I'm starting to lose track of how many people have come to me in the last
few days whining about "the board signing the cda/nda".

in 2004 (go check the minute archives) hp was pressuring the board to sign
an nda, essentially saying sign or we won't talk to you.  you can easily see
in the archives where the board DID approve the WORDING of the nda (after
extensive negociations with hp) but NO WHERE will you see that the board
SIGNED an nda.

because IT DID NOT HAPPEN!

additionally, http://www.openmpe.org/minutes/Minutes20051215.htm clearly
shows that hp relented.

hp and the board have operated all these years under a 'gentlepersons'
understanding that our conversations are private.  it's been this
understanding that fostered an atmosphere of trust for hp, showing that
openmpe was/is/and remains serious about our quest to preserve mpe's future.

no one is more frustrated than the board about how long this process has
taken.  but I'll dare to say that it has only been openmpe's board that's
had the dogged determination to 'keep after hp' regarding mpe.  when anyone
else can show that they've continuously worked for hp for one purpose, then
maybe the nay-saying and otherwise faithless support of openmpe will be
justified.

      - d 'speaking for myself and not the board'

---
Donna Hofmeister
Allegro Consultants, Inc.
408-252-2330


> -----Original Message-----
> From: HP-3000 Systems Discussion [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
> Behalf Of Wirt Atmar
> Sent: Saturday, October 25, 2008 1:50 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [HP3000-L] OpenMPE Minutes for October 9th.
> 
> Donna writes:
> 
> > Those are the rules we have to play by, unfortunately.
> >
> > I wish we were allowed to talk about what we're working on to be able
> to
> > give y'all (I don't know if that word has a british translation ;-) a
> sense
> > of what's being done and what progress is being made.
> >
> > I guess one might be able to say "hmmm...they're meeting with hp a
> > lot...and maybe that means something is happening"?
> 
> As I've written before, having the OpenMPE committee agree to sign non-
> disclosure agreements was one of the dumbest mistakes that the
> committee
> could have ever made, and in the end, could well be attributed to be
> the
> single greatest contributor to the death of MPE, beyond HP's own
> mishandlings
> of the product.
> 
> However, there is a reasonable alternative that might help remedy the
> situation for all concerned and still work within HP's rules: have
> everyone on
> HP3000-L sign a non-disclosure agreement, just as the board has done.
> Secondly, detailed records of the minutes would be posted on passworded
> website so that only authorized users could read the minutes, but where
> that
> password be given out to only those who signed the HP NDA.
> 
> The punishment for anyone breaking this NDA could easily be made quite
> severe. Anyone found in violation of the NDA, for any reason, could be
> banned
> from HP's customer list, so that HP would never again sell a new HP3000
> to
> them for all time in the future.
> 
> This simple solution would seem to work in everyone's favor.
> 
> Wirt Atmar
> 
> * To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
> * etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *

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