Subject: Re: public? Re: Call for Votes: New OSI-Editors List
From: Brian Behlendorf <>
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 18:36:14 -0800 (PST)

On Tue, 27 Nov 2007, Zak Greant wrote:
> Hi Larry, Greetings All,
> On 11/27/07, Lawrence Rosen <> wrote:
>> Zak Greant wrote:
>>> It is primarily an administrative, ombuds and service role - rather
>>> than making policy, editors focus on helping good and representative
>>> policy to be made.
>> Given this definition of the role, I withdraw my agreement to serve. I do
>> not have time to perform an administrative function that OSI cannot fund
>> directly by its Board doing necessary fundraising.
> I am curious as to what you thought that you were signing up for?

Go easy, Zak, we're still defining all this.  The conflict of interest 
portion rubbed me the wrong way too; just like the Wikipedia's ban on 
people being able to edit their own or employers' pages.  I can see not 
allowing someone who *proposed a license* to be allowed to triage issues 
associated with that license, but otherwise I think the transparency of 
actions and natural diversity of opinions between editors will keep us 

I do have sympathy for Larry's position that the more administerial this 
activity is defined to be, the more it seems like something OSI could hire 
for.  But I don't think it was intended to be administerial - we're not 
being asked to be Eunuchs writing a book on sex.