Stan Sieler wrote:
>
> Greg asks:
>
> > I'm not sure what your point is here
>
> What happened is that you posted the list of current board members...
> most of the people at the office looked at it and said:
> who are *they*?

It seemed to me, as I read the discussion about Chad's candidacy,
that there was some confusion and ignorance about the actual makeup
of the Board, specifically relating to job function. I thought it
might be useful to get some facts on the table.

> Several of us are frequent conference attendees/speakers, and
> we didn't recognize most of the names, either.

Well, someone must recognize them, since they got a few votes at
some point 8^).

> Did you read my posting?  I pointed out it wasn't a requirement!
> (And, thus, isn't a litmus test)

I read it several times. I'm still not convinced, especially given
your clarification below.

> I was making, too subtly, a point:
>
>    There's been a lot of talk about Interex due to various recent
>    events.
>
>    Not one board member has made a single comment about *any* of
>    this (or other Interex comments) on HP3000-L.
>
>    Where are they?

You're talking to one, as I noted in the original list.

Now that you've explained your point, let me see if I understand it
correctly. What I *think* you're saying is that you expect the Board
to respond on 3000-L to the Interex discussions of the past few
days. With all due respect, if that if your intention, then I
suggest you address the Board directly at [log in to unmask]
with specific questions and issues. I'm not convinced it
is reasonable to expect the Board to be actively reading
and responding to 3000-L, quite frankly, any more than it is
reasonable to be expecting Lew Platt to be actively reading
and posting to HP-related groups on Usenet.

- Greg
--
Greg Cagle                                      Hewlett-Packard Company
503.598.8205 or 800.477.6111 x9727             [log in to unmask]
Life is a tragedy for those who feel, and a comedy for those who think.