[foundation-board] URGENT: Problems with a specific individual and OKF projects

Jordan S Hatcher jordan at opencontentlawyer.com
Tue Nov 16 21:38:18 UTC 2010

On 16 Nov 2010, at 21:02, Jo Walsh wrote:

> On 16/11/2010 09:23, James Casbon wrote:
>> Do you think, as her friend, you could ask her to
>> tell you the fraud she thinks has taken place?  At least then we can
>> actually deal with the claim.
> After a bit of probing on question of alleged fraud, got down to this:
> [[The specific allegation is that the LOD2 OKFn project deliverable is my proposal for which OKFn has gotten funding and then left me out]]
> For "my proposal", read "a registry of open government data services and resources".

This is clearly not anywhere close to fraud.  She is in my opinion so completely off the reservation that responding to her in detail seems to me a total and complete waste of time. Every time I've done so she seems to come up with some even more tortured logic and strange interpretation that needs even more parsing and correcting, which leads to even more time being sunk into yet another wasted conversation.

I think by trying to interpret this as being specifically about the above proposal, which I'm still not clear was ever actually submitted, you're being charitable Jo.  She's also tried to classify as fraud:

* any surplus whatsoever that the OKF could make on a project
* that the OKF could be involved in a paid way for anything related to open source (as somehow that means it's "free" as in beer)
(see also Jonathan's email in this thread)

Again so completely off base that I don't see how trying to engage in a constructive conversation would be anything other than a waste of time.

> So, we could address this by publishing information about exactly what LOD2 deliverables OKF is working on (and who is working on them).
> I know this is covered by http://lod2.eu/ but the description there is kind-of high-level. http://lod2.eu/WorkPackage/wp9.html describes a GovData.EUservice, with OKF as one of the partners on the work package.

I've given all of this to her before. The LOD2 page is as detailed as the deliverables are.  I don't know why any of us should spend any of our time trying to pull this information together for her, especially when at least when multiple times I've done so in the past she consistently doesn't bother to read anything sent across to answer her questions, throws her hands up in the air says "I'm too busy to read all of this", and then proceeds to ignore the facts being presented to her and go on to create yet another email that needs endless correcting.

If she cares enough about the issues she claims expertise in, and believes in the meritocracy that is supposed to *also *be at the heart of the OKF, then she would take her own initiative and actually *do something.

I for one have spent enough time trying to work with her to explain matters as if she was a rational human being. I've spent way too much time on evenings and weekends on this. I'm done.  

Rather than wasting time trying to engage in any type of constructive dialogue (which consistently proves impossible), I think that the OKF should go for a containment policy in all matters related to her until she demonstrates an ability to act differently. 



Mr. Jordan S Hatcher, JD, LLM

More at: <http://www.jordanhatcher.com>
Co-founder:  <http://www.opendatacommons.org>
Open Knowledge: <http://www.okfn.org/>

More information about the foundation-board mailing list