From: Greg Pettengill (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Thu Jun 28 2007 - 16:29:25 EEST
Thank you for pointing this out. I indeed meant to write "an uninterested
non-commercial entity" instead of a "disinterested" one.
I still believe it would be wise to not rule out potential help just
because it is commercial.
-- Best Regards Greg Pettengill Cote' Art & Engineering <http://coteart.com/index.html> Practicing an art, no matter how well or badly, is a way to make your soul grow." (Kurt Vonnegut, Jr. 1923-2007) On 6/28/07, Adrian Bowyer <A.Bowyer@bath.ac.uk> wrote: > > Greg Pettengill wrote: > > > You are much too modest! As it appears to me now, it would be better to > > have an interested commercial entity running the list rather than a > > disinterested non-commercial entity. I believe the RPML could elect a > > Board of Directors from its subscribers to make its policy decisions. > > If such a board were to exist, why wouldn't a commercial entity be > > acceptable to carry on the day-to-day upkeep? > > It is clearly important that those running RPML should be disinterested > but not uninterested. > > -- > > Best wishes > > Adrian > > Dr Adrian Bowyer > http://staff.bath.ac.uk/ensab > http://reprap.org >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Tue Jan 01 2008 - 18:13:05 EET