Re: Questions regarding the Security Secretary Position
On 22 Oct 2001, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
>John Galt <email@example.com> writes:
>> They aren't reasonable things to add at the last minute. The search
>> happened, AFAICT there is a candidate, yet you had to object now. If it
>> was so reasonable, why didn't you mention it when it came up?
>> Reasonableness cannot be applied to concepts that are brought up at the
>> last minute: the very fact that they were shoved in at the last minute
>> makes them unreasonable. Now do as I asked and shut up.
>Actually, the security team was operating all the time under the
>expectation that the person should be a developer, despite the public
>statement on the list (as has already been said).
You just don't know when to drop things, do you? I've told you to shut
up twice, at least two others have at various times told us to drop it,
and one person's pointed out that you ECP'd it in the first place. I'm
almost positive Joey's ready to kill us (I've finally removed him from the
CC list, as he really isn't germane to this discussion any more...)
>Nor for that matter is it unreasonable for me to make a suggestion
>late in the day; it is for the appropriate people to decide whether or
>not they want to take the suggestion--where that is the security
>team--and I'm happy to let them take whatever suggestions I might
>offer and do with them what they think fit.
The whole problem here is they DIDN'T ask you. You threw in your two
cents worth without a corresponding pledge of support.
>As for why I didn't bring it up sooner: I simply hadn't noticed it
>sooner. I don't therefore void my right to bring it up, though the
No, but you DO make yourself a hypocrite for calling ME obstructionist...
Compared to you, I'm a piker in this context apparently.
>security team would be well within its rights to decide that it's too
>late to change things.
Be Careful! I have a black belt in sna-fu!
Who is John Galt? firstname.lastname@example.org