NOTE:  I have removed the "OT" from the subject line of
this thread...  SURELY *this* is ON topic for 3000-L..

WRT the no press "flap", this morning Denys said:

> ...
> Two things come to mind.
> 1- Not a single one of the protagonists came to tell me
> about it.  .... I have no problems with grandstanding.
> ...  But it would have been even more efficient to tell
> me or some other director or Ron Evans about it and
> ALSO do the grandstanding.
>
> 2- I am surprised that none of the offended parties
> even considered for a second that someone might have
> screwed up.  ...
>
> .... It is definitely NOT the position of Interex that
> the press be excluded from any public event.  .....
> Someone at Interex screwed up, I know who it is, and
> this is being addressed.
> ...
> Now, I understand people like to stir the pot and
> inflame situations and I say, "knock yourself out."
> However, this issue has nothing to do with the
> elections or Interex's position on issues.  It's a
> screw-up by one person, plain and simple.  ...


Then John Clogg and Brian Dumcombe correctly pointed out:

> ... Bob Combs was present at the roundtable meeting at
> which this incident occurred.  Perhaps that allowed us
> to feel that it was not necessary to run to your booth
> to inform the board.  ....

> Given that both the current and immediately past chair
> of the Interex board was in the audience and did not
> speak out and correct the situation, I was left to
> assume that the Interex board was in agreement with
> the press ban.

...  and Ron Seybold replied at length:

> ...
> I'm the member of the press who bolted to the front of
> the roundtable room, to avoid having a burly security
> guard forcibly eject me.
> ...
> I spent the first 10 minutes of the roundtable wondering
> if the LA County Sheriff would be waiting outside the
> door, to haul me downtown for trespassing. ...

What they said...  *AND*:  Especially for those who were
not anywhere near the scene at the time of the "incident":
Keep in mind that this was not some ivory-tower academic
exercise that lent itself to being carefully dissected in
a leisurely manner:  For at least a minute or two it
appeared to several of us that there was a real threat
that physical force might be applied to Ron's body to
eject him from the area:

(1)  The roundtable had just started, and the counter on
our precious few minutes to interact onsite with "CSY"
was running.

(2)  After Ron almost literally jumped out of the hands
of two security personal and made his dash to safety at
the front of the room, expect he was not the only one
wondering if this "incident" was over yet...  What if
security would have followed him in to the room and
continued to insist that he leave;  or (even worse) if
that REAL big security guard tried to lay hands on Ron
and literally drag him out of the room ??..  THEN WHAT
??..  well, I can't speak for anyone else, but I would
at least have been ready to say "Either The3000 NewsWire
stays, or I walk out"...  and I would not have been
bashful about suggesting that everyone else follow me
out the door...  Maybe we (including the panel) could all
have gone outdoors and (sort of) continued on the patio..

(3) When I went out to talk to Interex staff just outside
the room at the time of the "incident", I did not get any
hint of willingness to admit this was a "mistake";  only
that (in effect) they decided not to have the security
people physically grab Ron to avoid an even worse scene
(that at least was a wise decision on their part).

(4)  After it started to look like Ron would indeed be
allowed to stay, we the attendees and the panel had
already unnecessarily wasted several minutes of our
precious HP e3000 roundtable time.  We certainly were
not going to interject an even longer interlude right at
that point to go running all over the massive LACC to
find the "right" Interex person...  and anyway, as per
above both the current and past Interex chairs were in
the room at the time.

My SUMMARY of all above:  No way was this "grandstanding":
We the attendees were presented without prior notice with
what I believe it is fair to say was an immediate and
unacceptable situation.  It was either do what we did on
the spot on the spur of the moment or (for all we knew)
sit quietly by and let Ron Seybold get dragged out of the
room in the next 30 seconds by the renta-cops...  As per
my previous, I think Interex is fortunate they pulled
back from the brink of said "dragging out"; or in my mind
odds are pretty good they would have had 100+ incensed
MPE attendees crowding the Interex show office about one
minute later...


WRT to the Interex BOD and / or staff;  and "what did
they know and when did they know it", Ron continued with
what I consider a "smoking gun":

> ... I had already mentioned the problem to Bob Combs
> (Interex board chair) and Ed Witkow (also of the board)
> in the aisle before Carly Fiorina's speech -- 24 hours
> before Interex staff tried to bar the press.  Neither
> of the Interex board members had any knowledge of the
> policy, or wished to comment.
>
> Later on during the day before the roundtable, I asked
> Ron Evans, Interex Executive Director, about the
> mistaken policy and who was responsible. He said two
> HP executives had asked the user group to bar the press
> -- and that Interex "granted the favor in return for
> one that HP did us."

Well..  I can see now that Denys is at least half-right;
when he said:   "Someone at Interex screwed up, I know
who it is, and this is being addressed."  ...  i.e.:  It
wasn't just one person at Interex:  IMO the two unnamed
"HP executives", all Board members who were informed,
AND the Executive Director ALL royally screwed up on this
one...

SIDEBAR:  Does anyone else think it's more than a little
strange that two senior HP executives would consider it
a favor if Interex would help them keep potentially
important and timely information from those customers
who could not attend ??..  and that Interex would be so
(apparently) desperate for whatever the favor was that
they got in return that they would AGREE to grant that
request ??..


In replying to Denys John Burke took us from looking
back to "leaning forward":

> Actually, there are two issues here, only one of which
> you are in a position to address. The first issue is
> why did HP request press exclusion in the first place?
> This is the issue you and Interex can not address. The
> second, is why did a representative or Interex agree to
> the point where room monitors were instructed to examine
> badges at the door. Furthermore, why did the Executive
> Director, knowing Wednesday that some people considered
> this an issue, not do anything about it and not inform
> the Board about it? These are issues you can deal with
> and apparently are.

What he said...  And:  Since the past is past, I think
what many of us are looking for are two simple things:

(1)  An admission from HP and Interex that this whole
fiasco was a mistake on both their parts.

(2)  Some assurance that a similar blunder won't happen
again...

IMO the worst thing HP and Interex could do now is to
try and stonewall on this and / or pretend it never
happened..  Wirt's words from many moons ago come easily
to mind:  "The cover-up is almost always worse than the
crime...  If only Bill and Monica had remembered that.."

...  O.K..:  Maybe I'm getting *slightly* carried away
(but not much, me thinks)...  But while I may not have
had to "run a mile" in Ron's shoes during this incident,
I was certainly close enough to see him move pretty fast
in them to get away from that big security guy...  Maybe
we'll joke about this a little in coming months at some
SIG-BAR meeting...  but I can tell y'all that nobody was
laughing while it was happening...

BTW Footnote:  One think this is NOT:  It is not the
fault of lower-level Interex staff who only carried out
orders from "above":  Whether they were asleep at the
switch or actively involved, the Board (collectively)
and especially the Executive Director are responsible...



Finally, Cecile did a short preview of that SIG-BAR
meeting (missed you at the SIGRAPID swan-song, Cecile);
WRT to Ron, the big renta-cop, and Denys:

> But Denys is twice as big as you are!

And the security guard was even bigger than Denys...

good night, all...

Ken Sletten

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *