In message <[log in to unmask]>, Jerry
Fochtman <[log in to unmask]> writes

>And although we've all been critical of the decision that was made to
>exclude the press from the session, I haven't heard anyone say anything
>about the reciprocal part of the arrangement that was to provide the
>press with unlimited access to HP mgmt on a one-on-one.  Perhaps none
>of the press at the show found this effort to provide access beneficial.

Just a WAG, but I wonder if the focus of the attempted press exclusion
wasn't related to anything that HP Management planned to say, but rather
to how the audience might treat them?

Was there a perception by HP's management that since the 11/14
announcement the user community has been gently simmering, here
mollified by migration webcasts, there aroused by OpenMPE uncertainties,
and so on - but with the fear that matters might come to a head at
Interex - and at that session particularly - and make the 'Boston Tea
Party' look like a mere picnic?

In which case, they might well decide they didn't want the press
witnessing, and reporting on, the resulting fiasco.

But nobody from HP management would have any problems talking one-to-one
with the press. Because what they might have to say was never the focus
of the apprehensions.
--
Roy Brown        'Have nothing in your houses that you do not know to be
Kelmscott Ltd     useful, or believe to be beautiful'  Wm Morris

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