Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2010 Archives by date, by thread · List index

On Sat, 06 Nov 2010 12:04:36 -0600, Ian <> wrote:

On Sat, 2010-11-06 at 18:55 +0100, Gianluca Turconi wrote:
Il 06/11/2010 17.50, Robert Holtzman ha scritto:
> That's fine as long as those hands remain benevolent. Not always a good
> assumption.

If you think so, no foundation is needed at all.
Gianluca Turconi

To me, the main reason to have a Foundation is to have a central place
to gather and administer resources. Democratic or benevolent
dictatorship? That is an entirely different debate.

The goal of doing this is to generate income for the foundation, so having an audit on the administration doesn't really acomplish anything. Just show distrust to generate income. At the same time, even if such distrust exist, it doesnt really matter as long as it shows (with actions more than number) that is reaching it's goal.

In other words, you dont care if a government has corruption inside it's administration as long as you see performing well. Doing constant audits doesn't really matter if there is no 'jobs' or whatever is needed in the country.

You can apply the same thing to any other service public or private. Liability is a factor of life.

Alexandro Colorado
GPG: 68D072E6

Unsubscribe instructions: Email to
Posting guidelines:
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.