[Top] [All Lists]

RE: [ontac-forum] Off-topic postings

To: "ONTAC-WG General Discussion" <ontac-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "Cassidy, Patrick J." <pcassidy@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 20:13:40 -0500
Message-id: <6ACD6742E291AF459206FFF2897764BE697851@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  I take that as a vote to accept his postings.
  In answer to the question:
    "why would somebody want to silence him"
  (1)  there is no possibility of silencing him.  He has for years posted the same material to any number of different  listservers, where his comments are as irrelevant to them as they are to our efforts.  Every listserver has a purpose and people who use listservers to push their opinions on people who don't want to hear them are not performing any constructive purpose.
  (2)  we welcome every comment that is in fact relevant to the efforts we are attempting.  But his attitude is summed up in his comment:
      "This is why ONTAC and all other such government-supported activities should be terminated. "
       . . . I think you will agree that that does not advance any project of the ONTACWG?
  (3) I have had notes from serious participants saying that they will have to leave if the number of irrelevant postings is not reduced, and some specifically mentioned PSP.
  (4) if you think that he will ever be willing to focus on actual constructive action, I suggest that you read his blogs and try to engage him in a rational dialog on some topic.
  (5) there are other listservers that deal specifically with the topics that Dr. Prueitt wants to discuss, but ours is not one of them and he will not confine his postings to them
  this is not to say that there is absolutely nothing of interest in what he is saying.  It is just completely unrelated to the serious constructive efforts we are making.  The ONTACWG is not a discussion group, it is a working group, and its purpose is to build information artifacts that were useful for relating knowledge classification systems to each other.  As a volunteer group we have extremely limited time in which to do the complicated work that is required to achieve our goals, and every distraction reduces our chances of success.  I believe that the goals are important.  I have seen one ontology study group disintegrate because of multiple irrelevant postings like that of Dr. Prueitt, and I am determined that that will not be the fate of this group.
The web is very large, and he has his own blog, to which he provides many pointers in postings around the web.  He has a forum.  The ONTACWG does not have to become just another.

Patrick Cassidy
MITRE Corporation
260 Industrial Way
Eatontown, NJ 07724
Mail Stop: MNJE
Phone: 732-578-6340
Cell: 908-565-4053
Fax: 732-578-6012
Email: pcassidy@xxxxxxxxx


From: ontac-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontac-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Barnett, Dee CSM USA Directorate of Doctrine
Sent: Monday, November 21, 2005 6:53 PM
To: ONTAC-WG General Discussion
Subject: RE: [ontac-forum] Off-topic postings

You all are the subject matter experts here.  Most of what you are saying, I barely get.  I am in the WG because of my involvement in an Army project.  As I try to read all of this, though, his comments and responses are as valid as any others, so why would somebody want to silence him?
Dee K. Barnett CSM (R)
Contractor, ASRC Communications
Intelligence Support to Counter IED
Directorate of Doctrine
US Army Intelligence Center
Comm: 520-538-1182
DSN: 879-1182

From: ontac-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of Cassidy, Patrick J.
Sent: Mon 11/21/2005 10:10
To: ONTAC-WG General Discussion
Subject: [ontac-forum] Off-topic postings

In response to a note to him concerning the content of his postings, Paul Prueitt has requested that the members of the ONTACWG explicitly state whether they want to see more postings from him:
[PSP] I am happy to not make anymore posts if the majority of those in the working group who wish to vote will ask this of me.  So please vote - but do it publicly. 
Since we have over 100 members, some of whom have already expressed to me their wish that postings be fewer and adhere more closely to the purposes for which the working groups was created, it would produce less distracting email if the process were inverted -- those who **do** wish to receive more postings from Paul Prueitt (PSP), may send a note publicly to the list or, if you prefer not to contribute to excessive email for other members, you can send a note to both myself and to Paul Prueitt directly.  This question will remain open until Tuesday night, and I will post the result on Wednesday.
If fewer than 25 members express a desire to see additional postings from Paul Prueitt, I would suggest that those discussions be conducted via a direct e-mail list of interested individuals.  If 25 or more, the question will be presented as a formal vote for the entire group.
Any decisions I take can be reversed by a majority vote of the members of ONTACWG.

Patrick Cassidy
MITRE Corporation
260 Industrial Way
Eatontown, NJ 07724
Mail Stop: MNJE
Phone: 732-578-6340
Cell: 908-565-4053
Fax: 732-578-6012
Email: pcassidy at mitre.org


Message Archives: http://colab.cim3.net/forum/ontac-forum/
To Post: mailto:ontac-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://colab.cim3.net/file/work/SICoP/ontac/
Community Wiki: 
http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?SICoP/OntologyTaxonomyCoordinatingWG    (01)
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>