OPENMPE Archives

December 2002

OPENMPE@RAVEN.UTC.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
"Jonathan M. Backus" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Date:
Thu, 19 Dec 2002 09:53:47 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (68 lines)
Chuck,

        I fully respect your opinions and your right to express them.  I'm sorry
you feel the efforts of myself and/or the current OpenMPE board are
unethical, questionable, or are not meeting your needs.  OpenMPE is designed
to be a community control organization with the membership selecting a group
of people to represent them as board members, of which I am one.  Perhaps
(assuming you are a member) if your feelings are held by the majority of the
OpenMPE members, it would be best to vote me, or any other board member that
is not representing your needs, out during the next election.

        In the meantime, I will continue to try and represent the community to the
best of my ability.

Thanx,
        Jon

-----Original Message-----
From: OpenMPE Support Group [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of
Chuck Ryan
Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 9:44 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [OPENMPE] MPE Licensing (Thanks to Jeff Vance)


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jonathan M. Backus [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 8:18 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: MPE Licensing (Thanks to Jeff Vance)
>
>
> Chuck,
>
>         Because of a Non-disclosure agreement, I was not
> permitted to be more
> specific then that.  The fact that HP decided to be more
> specific later was
> their choice, right, and was greatly appreciated.  I refer to
> Tom's earlier
> reply on all other points.
>
> Thanx,
>         Jon
>

Ah, my mistake, I thought OpenMPE was independent of HP.

It is very interesting that you were willing to make a post that
misrepresented the purpose of your discussion. It appears that instead of
asking for suggestions you were actually testing the waters for HP about
their proposed price. I personally would have found this to be ethically
questionable, but that is just me.

Comments are my own, not my employer's... etc.





CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: This electronic message is legally privileged and
confidential information intended only for the use of the addressee.  If you
are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
dissemination, distribution or reproduction of this message or any
attachment is strictly prohibited.  If you received this message in error,
please notify the sender by reply e-mail, so that our address record can be
corrected and delete it immediately.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2