Re: [oiic-formation-discuss] PROPOSAL -- Name change for proposed TC

[marbux <marbux@gmail.com>]

On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 8:20 AM, Craig A. Eddy <tyche@cox.net> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

> You sent a communication to my private address, CCing this group, in
> which you expounded at great length as to my knowledge, abilities and
> affiliations.

Only partially correct. I apologize for sending the email to your
private address. I have been diligently attempting to avoid that
because of the incorrect settings in the mail server for this list
that place the author of a message as the Reply to addressee and the
list as a CC. However, I have occasionally forgotten to correct that
problem in responding to emails.

I did not expound on your affiliations. I asked questions about them.
And as to abilities, my only criticism was the ignorance displayed by
the person person with legal training who drafted the content of your
post.

> 1.  I am Craig A. Eddy (I know I am.  It says so on my driver's
> license), also known as Tyche on websites, blogs, and IRC.  One such
> site you have already managed to find.  Congratulations!

I had no substantial doubt you were the same person because of the
identity of email addresses used on this list and identified on that
web site.
>
> 2.  I am a private U.S. citizen with the rights to my own opinions,
> just as you have rights to your opinions.  I don't claim that my
> opinions are the ONE TRUE WAY, or that all others must be subservient
> to mine.  In fact, I have been known to be wrong on occasion.  I think
> the last time was a year or so ago.

No. Your post that I responded to was a parade of errors, as I
explained. You have been wrong far more recently than "a year or so
ago."  The difference between us is that when error is brought to my
attention I retract or amend my prior statement.

> 3.  My volunteer affiliations, such as being a member of the
> Ubuntu-Arizona Team, have no bearing on this mailing list, and no
> influence on my opinions concerning ODF or the formation of a
> Technical Committee.

Good. That is disclosure I requested.

I'm almost surprised that you didn't try to use
> the fact that I'm registered on the Groklaw website as one of the
> foundations for your diatribe.

I am not a fan of the Groklaw web site and waste little of my time there.

It would have had as much bearing on
> the matter:  i.e. none at all.

Actually. It does. This list has been inundated by people lacking any
familiarity with the factual and legal issues involved as a result of
Miss Jones' article calling for people to watch this list in order to
avoid abuse by Microsoft. As Microsoft had previously announced that
it was the ODF TC it was joining and as it has done since, Microsoft
is working on the ODF TC, not in this proposed TC. You have been
directed to the wrong forum, sir.

>
> 4.  I am not a lawyer, nor am I trained in legal matters.  My degree
> is in philosophy.  To quote an old joke, "these ears are finely tuned
> BS detectors".  My opinions and comments are not written by either an
> attorney at law nor an attorney in fact.  I'm quite capable of writing
> my own opinions, as I have and did.

As a retired major litigator, I suspect that my ears are far more
finely tuned BS detectors as to the issues involved in this meeting
than yours are. I do not accept your statement that you wrote your
post yourself without the assistance of a person with legal training
unless you disclose that you have had such experience. The form you
used is easily recognizable by any lawyer who has engaged in any
substantial amount of civil litigation. It is unmistakably the form
used to respond to formal requests for discovery in U.S. courts.

Really, should I take your
> presumption that they were written by an attorney as a compliment or
> as an insult?

Your choice. Either way, they were error ridden and you have made no
retraction.

> 5.  I am not a member of, nor even heard of, the Ubuntu Foundation,
> nor do I speak for any organization, affiliation, corporate entity or
> individual with regard to ODF or the OIIC TC.  If they choose to go in
> my direction, that's up to them.  I'm sure they can come to their own
> opinions without help from me.

Sorry I got the name of the foundation wrong. Glad to hear you speak
only for yourself.
>
> 6.  You mentioned Mark Shuttleworth, as if that were some sort of
> "whip" to hold over me.  Since he is not my employer such
> name-dropping misses its "mark" by quite a bit.  He is welcome to view
> and comment on my opinions, just as you and anyone else are.  However,
> he has no influence or bearing on how or whether I voice my opinions
> concerning ODF or the OIIC TC.  It is a well known fact that an
> individual can have interests and opinions outside of those held by
> groups to which one is affiliated.  To presume otherwise is to attempt
> to pidgin-hole individuals into tight, narrow boxes.  Sorry, I'm to
> fat to fit in such a box.

I did not say that you were affiliated in any way with Mr.
Shuttleworth. I asked if you were representing the foundation because
the position you took is inconsistent with the interests of the free
and open source software community.

> The rest of the drivel in your post isn't worth my commenting on as it
> is off topic, irrelevant, ad hominem and lacks any bearing on reality
> at all.  It simply demonstrates the use of allegations, insinuations
> and presumptions without any foundation in fact.  They are your
> opinions, and you are welcome to them. Just as I am welcome to ignore
> any further postings of yours as being unimportant and not worthy of
> my time to read them.

I disagree with your characterization of my statements. I note your
lack of specific identification of any statement you characterize with
what are standing alone mere buzzwords. You offer me nothing to
respond to in your above paragraph.

> Paul E. Merrell, J.D. (Marbux), I turn my back on you.  And so, the
> shunning begins.

Fine with me. I'm not here looking for love.  I'm here to clean up an
interop mess. Enjoy your ignorance of the subject matter. I have to
admit that ignorance is a lot easier than studying the subject matter
for years as your discipline. Or was your ignorance just an act? If
so, you played the part magnificently and I compliment your skill as
an actor. I only responded to your post because you used a form
familiar to any lawyer in the U.S. that every filed or responded to a
discovery request and displayed only ignorance of the subject matter.
You were easy pickings, my friend.

Best regards,

Paul E. Merrell, J.D. (Marbux)

-- 
Universal Interoperability Council
<http:www.universal-interop-council.org>