LPI-DE stops working

martin f krafft madduck at madduck.net
Sun Jul 28 12:12:24 EDT 2002


also sprach Chuck Mead <csm at lpi.org> [2002.07.27.1844 +0200]:
> The more I think about this the more irritated I get. Peer's first act
> after he was elected chair of his group at Cebit was to move the group
> over to being a strictly German effort, not an LPI-EU effort (and this
> was done with a representative from Mandrake and some Italians in the
> room and actively dissenting). Even the subject of his email says LPI-DE
> not LPI-EU. The lpi-euwg was intended to be a pan-european effort (LPI
> European Union Working Group).

Chuck, could you please realize that Europe != Germany! Noone of us
was ever opposed to a European LPI instance, but we stayed realistic.
Before LPI can do anything on the European market, it's got to have
a solid two feet standing on the mainland, and we decided to invest
our time in Germany. We never said that LPI-DE was to be exclusive for
Europe.

> Through Peer's own efforts it was never that. When I took the list
> down it was with the intent that we would surely be reorganizing
> (and we are) our efforts in Europe. I did not remove the list
> archives and the last message to the list may be seen here:

You removed the list without letting us know. That's either because
you never wanted to cooperate or because you were afraid of the
publication of what kind of pathetic game has been played between
LPI-DE and LPI Inc.

> You have to go all the way back into April to see any activity of
> significance when there was about 60K worth of traffic. Specifically,
> the last time that Peer Heinlein sent a message to the lpi-euwg list was
> the 24th of April:
> 
> http://lpi.org/pipermail/lpi-euwg/2002-April/000074.html
> 
> wherein he is explaining why he had been absent from the list for two
> weeks and then he never sent another email to the list again and that
> was the last of a grand total of 6 posts that he EVER sent to the list.
> In the same month Torsten sent 20 posts to the list and Martin Krafft
> sent 19.

It was in fact my initiative that made us split from lpi-euwg into our
own mailing list. For one, we wanted a German list, and we also wanted
it to include only those that act rather than just talk. Before we all
lost our enthusiasm due to LPI Inc's failure to accept that the German
market cannot be conquered with American methods, our lpi-de-core
forum was very active and *very* productive. As Peer said, we have all
in place: a business plan, an office, employees, and most importantly:
12 influential and capable people in the backend. We have direct
connections into vital parts of the German market, and we had
realistic visions and an energy and time to devote. You've blown that
bubble.

> So now this person who is the elected chair of a failed attempt at
> creating an afilliate organization is accusing ME of censorship after
> posting a total of 6 times to a list and the last of those was over 4
> months ago! If so much public work and effort has gone on where are the
> archives? I suspect that you created your own mailing list and conducted
> your dicussions there or you did it via private email. You certainly did
> not have any public discussions that I ever saw and now you have the
> gall to accuse me of censorship?

The point was simple (and it was my doing): lpi-euwg concerned itself
with talks about a webpage-to-be and everyone had "important" things
to add ("mustard" we'd call it in German). It was just not productive,
at least not as productive as required by the German market. lpi-euwg
was a classic example of a bunch of wannabe-activists with too little
clue and too little will to get their hands dirty. So we contacted
those who were actually interested and decided to get into gears. We'd
still be discussing random things on lpi-euwg. There was never an
intent to segregate, we just wanted to get things done. And guess
what's more productive: a team of 12 enthusiastic, capable,
influential, and experienced folks, or a random selection of some
40-or-so from all over the world without a leader or a clue.

> Bah... you censored yourself Peer!

Peer is one of those rare instances when someone is actually willing
to work for something he wants to be realized. You've just thrown
a very capable captain over board, and with him goes most of the crew.
I am sure that Torsten will stay. He's got the American thought.
That's not an insult to Torsten!

I am moderately pissed to say the least for having wasted so much time
with LPI Inc. The concept and exams are great and international, but
I've come to know the philosophy, people, and politics to be
inadequate and full of {it,them}sel|{f,ves}. Good luck on your path to
enclosing the European market.

-- 
martin;              (greetings from the heart of the sun.)
  \____ echo mailto: !#^."<*>"|tr "<*> mailto:" net at madduck
  
"security here. yes, ma'am. yes. groucho glasses. yes, we're on it.
c'mon, guys. somebody gave an aardvark a nose-cut: somebody who
can't deal with deconstructionist humor. code blue."
                      -- http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/armadillos.txt
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://list.lpi.org/pipermail/lpi-discuss/attachments/20020728/989d5630/attachment-0003.pgp


More information about the lpi-discuss mailing list