[Arm-netbook] EOMA - Open Specification?

[Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton]

On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 11:49 PM, peter green <plugwash at p10link.net> wrote:
> Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
>>
>>  good point. let me think... i know: if he doesn't listen then i will
>> resign.  that would terminate the project as he needs my technical
>> expertise
>>
>
> Your associate blacklisted someone because of a single launch product launch
> gone bad and that blacklisting extends not just to not collaborating with
> them on a product launch again (which would be perfecting understandable)
> but to banning them from using EOMA.

 peter.  the message to be sent to people is that they cannot fail to
keep in contact when dealing with billion dollar factories.  it
doesn't matter who they are: if you fail to keep us informed in a
timely fashion that you are not going to be able to keep to the
promise that you made, such that it embarrasses us to our
billion-dollar client, people need to learn that it has consequences.

 is that clear enough?

 all that aaron had to do was tell us, when we asked, a month after
the beginning of the campaign, how many orders he had.  he failed to
do so.  it was *three months* by the time he finally told us that he
had only 250 orders - a whopping 90% shortfall on the promise that he
had made, on the basis of which we made a promise to the factory that
there would be an order of 2500 units.

 if he had told us within the first month "i'm sorry but this is much
lower than i expected" we would have been able to go "ok, we have
time, let's see what we can do".

 but he kept the discussion going *WITHOUT ANSWERING THE QUESTION HOW
MANY ORDERS DO YOU ACTUALLY HAVE*.

 every time we asked him "how many orders do you have" he answered
with an answer that did not answer the question.

 he dodged this question time and time again, finally answering when
it was far too late.

 now, if there are any other people who wish to do the exact same
thing then i have absolutely no interest in dealing with them.

 can you understand and appreciate that?

 does it make sense?

 is it absolutely clear now?

 this has absolutely nothing to do with EOMA: it is a simple business
relationship.  we are interested to hear from people who can deliver
on their promises, but who, if they cannot deliver, are forthright
enough to be able to be honest and up-front about it.

 is that not unreasonable, peter?

 i would greatly appreciate your answer to these questions.  if i have
not satisfactorily answered your questions or if anything is unclear
please say so immediately.

l.