Print

Print


Dear John,

I appreciate this, and as others have said I have a lot of faith in your 
intention and ability to help sort out the unfortunate situation the 
administration of the TEI finds itself in.

I think you misrepresent those who are concerned to achieve more 
transparency in what happened as wanting to judge or assign blame to 
individuals. For my part it is irrelevant whether I think Martin was a 
good chair or not, whether I think his removal was good or bad for the 
TEI. The point is that things have happened *in a way* that people are 
very uncomfortable with, principally due to the lack of transparency (in 
both senses I mentioned last time). We want (a) to see some 
transparency, albeit too late, and (b) to see real changes in the bylaws 
of the Consortium to ensure this sort of thing is not able to happen in 
this autocratic way in the future.

Many thanks,

Gabby


On 2011-08-23 03:05, John Unsworth wrote:
> Gabby,
>
> I appreciate the point that Elena and you both make--that while the sequence
> of events have been explained, the real sense of what happened has not.
> What I can say, as a newcomer to the situation myself, and as someone who is
> trying to move things forward, is that the account of recent events that I
> presented is a statement of fact that encompasses all that the parties
> involved could unanimously endorse.  Beyond what is represented in my
> statement, there are differences of opinion about why things happened, and
> even about what happened.  Now, we could decide that the best thing is to go
> back and adjudicate these matters--who was right, and who was wrong--but
> honestly, I think the point here is the organization, not the individuals
> who happen to constitute its board (or its council, or even its membership)
> at the moment.  If I have to choose between a broad and open discussion
> about what should be the future of the organization, and a personally and
> professionally fraught process of assigning blame to individuals, it seems
> clear that the former is more constructive.  In the end, if the organization
> knows and articulates where it wants to go and what it is about, it will
> attract the leaders it should have.  I regard it as my main task over the
> next few months to promote and synthesize and implement ideas about the
> future direction of the TEI, and I really appreciate the time and effort
> that has already gone into this thread on both TEI-L and Twitter, including
> your own.
>
> John
>

-- 
Dr Gabriel BODARD
(Research Associate in Digital Epigraphy)

Department of Digital Humanities
King's College London
26-29 Drury Lane
London WC2B 5RL

Email: [log in to unmask]
Tel: +44 (0)20 7848 1388
Fax: +44 (0)20 7848 2980

http://www.digitalclassicist.org/
http://www.currentepigraphy.org/