|
Top-level
 @drewdevault I think it's obvious to everyone he's on the board because of what he achieved in the past, not because of who he is. It would follow that he should also not be on the board because of what he did in the past, regardless of what he may or may not be. No one would think of dismissing his actual work because "oh he only did that because he's ND". 2 comments
@drewdevault that was the point i was trying to make, guess I failed :) That either you weigh all of his past actions against each other and admit he's not a person that should be in position of power or publicity. Or you have an old man that no one really likes but "that's just the way he always was", in which case he most certainly should not be in that position. |
Gregory's Server
@virtulis "who he is" - load bearing phrase
How about "what he has done" or "what he is doing"? What he's done in the past is relevant to you insofar as it can be viewed as an "achievement", how about what he's done in the past that causes harm? Or how about his achievements in the present weighed against his actions -- in the present -- which still cause harm?