[sugar-sur] [Sugar-devel] [SLOBS] [IAEP] [SLOB] Motion regarding xo-computer icon

[Walter Bender]

On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 10:56 PM, Laura Vargas <laura en somosazucar.org>
wrote:

> Walter,
>
> I guess my question was not clear. My question is about the procedure to
> address legal issues to Conservancy.
>
> The procedure you (SLOB) follow the first time you want to address
> Conservancy was to just ask Adam (Sugar Labs rep to SFC) to make a question
> to Tony.
>
> The procedure you (SLOB) follow the second time was to ask SLOBs to
> approve an answer t (Sugar Labs rep to SFC) to make a question to Tony.
>
> I thank in advance to please specify, why do you follow two different
> procedures for the same process?
>

Quite simply, in the second exchange, Tony asked for the oversight board to
give their opinion. Since it was not apparent that we had consensus, I used
the motion mechanism to confirm that we had a majority agreeing to our
answer to his question. In both cases, I asked Adam, our liaison, to handle
the communication with Tony.

>
> Regards,
>
> Laura
>
> 2017-09-15 15:59 GMT-05:00 Walter Bender <walter.bender en gmail.com>:
>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 4:39 PM, Laura Vargas <laura en somosazucar.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Walter,  Adam,
>>>
>>> Am confused here. Why did we not need a motion to make the question to
>>> Tony in the first place?
>>>
>>> Can you please clarify.
>>>
>>
>> Tony asked for the opinion of the oversight board to several questions. I
>> posted those questions several days ago and while a discussion ensued, no
>> one (except me) actually answered the questions. I chose to make a motion
>> in order to focus on the questions that Tony had posed and to move things
>> along since there are several members of the community who have said that
>> this issue is urgent.
>>
>>>
>>> Procedure Note: In my opinion such legal related motions should be
>>> translated to Sugar Labs main users language: Spanish. This takes time but
>>> needs to be done so that real Sugar users can understand what the Oversight
>>> is requesting.
>>>
>>
>> We certainly can discuss this. We'd need some mechanism to execute it.
>>
>> regards.
>>
>> -walter
>>
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> 2017-09-15 15:26 GMT-05:00 Martin Dengler <martin en martindengler.com>:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> > On 15 Sep 2017, at 14:13, Lionel Laské <lionel.laske en gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > +1 for the motion.
>>>> >
>>>> > @Martin, thanks to wait for all votes or at least the end of voting
>>>> delay.
>>>>
>>>> Sure Lionel - what is the voting delay? I actually was waiting but the
>>>> wiki had been updated already (not by me) so I figured as the wiki had been
>>>> updated and the outcome was not in doubt it was ok to summarize it in an
>>>> email. I agree the delay should govern in the future.
>>>>
>>>> >           Lionel.
>>>>
>>>> Martin
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> SLOBs mailing list
>>>> SLOBs en lists.sugarlabs.org
>>>> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/slobs
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Laura V.
>>> * I&D SomosAZUCAR.Org*
>>>
>>> “Solo la tecnología libre nos hará libres.”
>>> ~ L. Victoria
>>>
>>> Happy Learning!
>>> #LearningByDoing
>>> #Projects4good
>>> #IDesignATSugarLabs
>>> #WeCanDoBetter
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Sugar-devel mailing list
>>> Sugar-devel en lists.sugarlabs.org
>>> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Walter Bender
>> Sugar Labs
>> http://www.sugarlabs.org
>> <http://www.sugarlabs.org>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Laura V.
> * I&D SomosAZUCAR.Org*
>
> “Solo la tecnología libre nos hará libres.”
> ~ L. Victoria
>
> Happy Learning!
> #LearningByDoing
> #Projects4good
> #IDesignATSugarLabs
> #WeCanDoBetter
>



-- 
Walter Bender
Sugar Labs
http://www.sugarlabs.org
<http://www.sugarlabs.org>
------------ próxima parte ------------
Se ha borrado un adjunto en formato HTML...
URL: <http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/sugar-sur/attachments/20170916/870bc8e8/attachment.html>