[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: I wish you a wonderful 2013 & DebConf13! (oh, and DebConf14 too)

Holger Levsen writes ("I wish you a wonderful 2013 & DebConf13! (oh, and DebConf14 too)"):
> So, and about the delay in sending this mail, which I started on January 1st 
> or 2nd: these false accusations on -project (you know who you are!) severely 
> damaged my motivation for DebConf and Debian. I think I finally got over it 
> somewhat, but in any case, please read
> http://lists.debconf.org/lurker/message/20121213.154200.58eeb2bd.en.html 
> which sadly wasnt posted to -project.

I wasn't going to say any more about this.  It seems to me that the
project as a whole has decided that it's water under the bridge.

But being accused of putting forward false accusations is too much.
The allegations I have made were not false.  They were true.[1]
Your denials are, I'm sorry to say, unconvincing.

Before I went public I went to some lengths to ensure the accuracy of
my allegations; this is one reason why these shenanigans only came to
public light after the DC13 site contract signature.

As you know I have been told the names of the proposed "anonymous
donors".  These names have also been put to you in private email, and
made known to the DPL.  I have personally verified by reference to the
DC wiki that these named people were not third parties, but rather
were people involved in helping organise DC13.

The reason I went public with my second message saying that there
seemed to be a coverup was precisely because you gave an inaccurate
answer when I asked whether the "donors" were involved with running
DC13, and failed to correct your misstatement when it was pointed out
to you and you were pressed to make a clarification.

Mistakes happen.  I'm sure that the "donors" were seized by an excess
of enthusiasm, and simply lacked the experience and background to tell
them that what they were doing wasn't acceptable.

What is not acceptable is the coverup - particularly, failing to
properly brief all the DC chairs.  I'm not saying that the "donors"
should be publicly named.  But the full details of the situation
should have been made known to all the DC chairs immediately, and when
rumours started a full and frank account should have been made public

Shooting the messenger is also not acceptable.  Inaccurate denials are
also not acceptable.


[1] I did make one error in that I imputed more and earlier knowledge
of the issue to the DPL; Stefano has posted to correct this.

Reply to: