Miro is right!

[absalom]

The way Justina Phoon's last PR on the Foundation sounded, they always wanted two Miro employees on the Board, which means it isn't democratic election. :-X

[xperis]

The way Justina Phoon's last PR on the Foundation sounded, they always wanted two Miro employees on the Board, which means it isn't democratic election. :-X

So I guess the fact that the community wanted Devs on the board means they weren't interested in a deomcratic system either.

The sad thing about this is some were chewed up and spit out based on incomplete information. And good people have left and some of the nasty ones seem to be staying.  Too bad

right now I would love for the core to have some kind of PR person to say ANYTHING.

Little good has come from silent attorneys.

[absalom]

So I guess the fact that the community wanted Devs on the board means they weren't interested in a deomcratic system either.

From what I can gauge of the core team (from the PMs I've got from them during this time of transition), they were quite prepared to get voted off at the end of their term. The powder keg at the formation of the Foundation was/is equal representation, and that still hasn't happened, as it's merely Miro and Productized as the board.

The sad thing about this is some were chewed up and spit out based on incomplete information. And good people have left and some of the nasty ones seem to be staying.  Too bad

Nasty ones seem to be staying ?

Talk to whoever runs Mambo Communities Pty Ltd about nasty behaviour. They are a sociological model of how not to manage the Foundation release on a public forum.

right now I would love for the core to have some kind of PR person to say ANYTHING.

Little good has come from silent attorneys.

I'm sorry, xperis, but this just comes across as hand waving for Miro.

Haven't you been reading this forum to recognise a PR team is already in the works??

Peter Russell is the current PR head for OSM and you can read his words here:
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1851546,00.asp

[CE5_Agent]

Just look at what eShox did to osCommerce, they did a really good job I might add. I have read the GPL a hundred times any of us can fork Mambo and call it something else. What I want to know is how can we as community break away from the forums and start focus groups, each of us has unique displines and backgrounds but getting togather and deciding on how we might work togather is really tough. Iused to have a site with over 100 members but no one wanted to participate. I have a list of at least 20 cool mambo components, but I could never complete myself. Any Ideas how we can better collabrate?

[rico!]

Wonder if this DevTeam would agree to these standards, because the lack of transparency in the process so far causes me a GREAT deal of concern...


The OS Developer’s Pledge to the Community

We recognize that the Community needs a stable DevTeam with open management that follows the needs and trends of the Community. We understand that we are looking to the Community for help and support, and we also understand that it is important to be a responsible member of the Community. We also recognize that failure to respect these rules of cooperation and trust can result in considerable disadvantages for Community. Accordingly, we pledge to respect the following principles:

We will maintain the best source possible

    Our most fundamental duty is to maintain the integrity of the source. We believe in giving our Community the best product possible at all times.


We will strive for stability and longevity

    For a distribution to be useful to the majority of the Community, longevity of compatible versions is a requirement. We pledge to not only maintain professionally the software, but also to help promote longevity and reliability.


We will communicate openly

    In a community-driven project, transparency is the key to freedom, trust, and honesty. We will keep communication channels open. We will take an active role in fostering communication between the DevTem and the Community. DevTeam members will be responsive to the Community and will be available to the Community.


We will consult with the Community

    We pledge to keep the Community involved, to seek the Community’s views, and to incorporate the Community’s desires in everything we do. We will make every effort to listen carefully to the Community, and make changes when necessary to help them use the software to its full potential.


We will take no step which harms the Community

    We work to benefit the Community’s best interests. The Community comes first in all our decisions. We pledge that we shall take no actions that harm or have the potential to harm the Community, nor shall we fail to take actions necessary to avoid harming the Community.


We will disclose our plans

    We work on behalf of the Community and we need the Community’s guidance. Accordingly, we will present our plans for development (our “roadmap”) for Community feedback and commentary. Where needed, we will revise the plan based on the Community feedback. We will provide full disclosure of all relevant information explaining why we recommend the steps in the plans and what the potential consequences might be. We will discuss with the Community alternative plans and our reasons for not recommending them.


We will not hide problems

    We will keep our entire bug report database open for public view at all times. Reports that people file online will promptly become visible to others. We will similarly not hide problems with relationships between our team and our sponsors, vendors, or community members, where those problems have the potential to negatively affect the community.


We will foster communication among developers and strive to identify technical leaders.[/b]

    Our team is a meritocracy. In an attempt to promote optimal efficiencies, we will assign jobs and responsibilities based on merit and commitment wherever possible. We will mentor less experienced members of the team so that they can improve their skills and may assume greater responsibility in the future.

[masterchief]

Thanks Ric.  I think that's a good basis for an "Our Commitment".  Couple of things need tuning (because we can't always please the entire community all the time) but I particularly like the end bit about mentoring.

[jgobiz]

Thanks Ric.  I think that's a good basis for an "Our Commitment".  Couple of things need tuning (because we can't always please the entire community all the time) but I particularly like the end bit about mentoring.

Hi Andrew,
i´ve just linked both messages in the german forum, because i guess it may much more lighten up, "why we have to bear with you"
Thanks in advance
Joern

[rico!]

Andrew, that wd be totally cool, but while we're on the subject, if you feel you can endorse that standard for the team -- can you explain to us how you reconcile the team's behavior up to this point?

Specifically, why wasn't the community consulted before you decided to abandon completely the entire structure? And since the break, why haven't you communicated to us your goals, your plans?

Help me understand. I'd love to support you guys, but at this time I feel like you've hijacked the ship.

[Predator]

Specifically, why wasn't the community consulted before you decided to abandon completely the entire structure? And since the break, why haven't you communicated to us your goals, your plans?

Help me understand. I'd love to support you guys, but at this time I feel like you've hijacked the ship.

How should this work? It would start with a thread and never ends. A guy in the german forum has posted this ( well is a bad google translation ):

Too ricohs contribution:  I find the whole thing something too idealistic.  With such practices the project would stand quietly and no step forward would come.

The paragraphs should be supplemented over "as much as possible".  Because Free software is called liberty for the programmers "in my eyes less" liberty for the Community "separates many more", who are to be done motivation, somewhat well (outstandingly) nevertheless much more largely, if it happens from own drive, not (only) because it happens on urge of the Community.  Thus the Dev team went also out of own drive, not on advice of the Community. would have one tries this step of the Com for discussion to present... it would not have gone.  It would have become an endless Thread. 

Decisions must be always made, the Com are however too large and too different, in order to make these decisions by agreement with it.  Perhaps it should be permitted the Com to select deputies (e.g. per country x persons), who represent then the interests of the Com standing behind it.  Similarly our party system, only evenly sincere Grin result:  Transparency + integration of the Com, as far as it is possible.  The future of the project must however always have priority before the interests of individual Com members.

[Troubadour]

To Rico - What is this, some kind of perfect world?

The devs put their own time into Mambo for the last X number of years. They did it because they love it, not because it provides them with any great amount of financial remuneration. At least not directly.

They're in a period where they're still re-grouping their forces and formulating a strategy. No doubt they're still reeling from the swifty that Miro has pulled.

So far they've given more to *ambo than anyone else. How can you doubt their commitment to the project? When all this went down they decided to take on a much larger responsibility than before. They could've just walked away.

I have faith that the people who brought us this great product will shortly let us know everything we need to know.

This isn't an off-the-shelf application we paid for - which would entitle us to all sorts of benefits. It's a labour of love and the devs owe us nothing.

We, on the other hand....

[rico!]

This isn't an off-the-shelf application we paid for - which would entitle us to all sorts of benefits. It's a labour of love and the devs owe us nothing.

I beg to differ --

(1) The DevTeam works for the Community;

(2) The software belongs to the Community, not the DevTeam (not to Miro, either);

(3) The DevTeam benefits as well, or they wd not do this -- they benefit from the support of the community, from the association with the community, from the prestige of the project, from being on the inside of developments and plans, of the shared knowledge, of the shared experience, etc. Developers benefit in many ways, don't think this is a one way street for one minute. (Seriously -- This is an important point and sd take some time and read up on the economics behind Open Source.);

(4) A large Open Source community with a viable commercial product is in many ways similar to a commercial enterprise and has to act responsibly toward it clients, its end users, and the 3PDs who have invested time effort, energy and money into the Community and the brand. Failure to do so causes harm to the Community and its members.


Mambo is not for the DevTeam to do with as they please, without consultation or inclusion of the Community.

[Troubadour]

We all get commercial benefit from Mambo. I sure as hell do. I don't see why the devs shouldn't benefit from their higher level of knowledge earned by the very fact of their contribution.

I don't agree with you on the rest of your points. Or at least not in the way you meant them. Sure they work for the community, but the way I see it they *are* the community. Unless you're willing to step up and contribute why should you have any kind of say in the direction of the product? I don't, but then I don't care to. I'm happy to help out on forums because I believe that karma-wise I should. I don't feel just using the software should give me any say in its future direction.

[Tyndal]

Hi rico,

uh... how to start?
Involving the com as far as possible should have high prior. But if the dev team would have asked the com about their opinion before they leave (look at this forum, some think they should go back!) - there wouldn't be a conclusion till now.

I agree with your thoughts in basic - but not in detail.
I do not have to pay anything - therefore i do not force the devs to do anything. If they want to include a guestbook - they should feel free (free software) to do so - if they ask the com whether to include a guestbook or not 50% would say "yes, great", 50% would say "no, don't need a guestbook". So what to do then?

And: working >40h/week on mambo does not allow you to do another paid job. Maybe devs profit by honor, glamour, knowledge and so on... but these things don't pay your bills and don't feed you.

I repeat myself: As long as i do not have to pay i do not force the devs to do sth

Of course you are right - devs should act with responsibility of the com, the 3pd, the brand and so on.
But someone has to do the "dirty" work, someone has to make decisions.

Again: The com is too big to make decisions! They should elect people to "fight for their wishes" (2 from each country) - this "board of wise women and men" can talk to the devs and make decisions.

I guess that would be some kind of democraty

tyndal

[Elpie]

Mambo is not for the DevTeam to do with as they please, without consultation or inclusion of the Community.

Actually, it is.  Just as you are free to take the code and use it however you wish, within the constraints of the licence and any copright obligations, so are they.  The "dev team" is not some kind of corporate entity and they do not have any kind of legal or moral obligation to do anything for anyone else.  They could have just walked.  Bye, bye community, see ya - and left it up to Miro to sort out.  The fact that they didn't, and the fact that they notified us of as much information that they legally could, says a lot about the commitment of these guys to the project.

The whole team has stuck together and stuck with us.  They could have saved themselves many sleepless nights and a lot of angst had they been selfish and just walked away.  They don't owe any of us a thing, but those of us who want to see the project continue sure owe them - big time! 

Sometimes, actions speak louder than words - the core team took the only action possible to them at the time and they were not in a position to talk about it first, or seek any advice other than that of their legal team.  It has been less than a week since this happened, and legal issues are not sorted out in just a few days, so please just be patient and wait until they can tell us what they are planning to do next. 

[xperis]

Rico is only talking about his vision of how an OPEN source community should work.

Didn't the dev team just walk away because they have standards that they set and didn't think the foundation met.

Rico is just expressing his standards and they are pretty good ones.  IF Rico has to just accept what is, why aren't you telling the Dev team to just work with it rather than walking away, making the project into a tech-tabliod story and hiding behind attorneys.

People working for the foundation posted for quite a while trying to communicate before it became clear people didn't even want to listen.

Here we live in days of silence.

Rico is trying to offer suggestions here.. good for him.  He could have just left and started OpenCommunicationMatters.com 

Nothing in his proposal is out of line. In fact it voices very nicely what we all say we are here looking for.  He is just pointing out it ain't happen at the moment.

So far

if (foundation) then {
  openness+community = very_important;
  walk(anger);
}
If (dev_team) then {
openness+community = lowered_standards;
  accept(excuses);
}

Is bad code that breaks our sites the only time we question the Dev team? or do we as the community at least express how we want things to be.

Right now on paper the foundation doesn't look very open.  Here in reality IT ISN't VERY OPEN.  Attorney's work for the client, it is up to the client to make sure the process matches their standards and integrity not the other way around.

Fighting for OPEN source by shutting down communication is like fighting for freedom by controlling the media.

Keep expecting the best Rico, someone has to.

[Tyndal]

Rico is only talking about his vision of how an OPEN source community should work.

you're right - i respect his visions - but they won't work. What about a Dev wanting to quit work because of personal reasons - does he have to ask the com to do so? With the commitment above he'd have to! Because leaving the team would weaken the team, the com and the project. Devs wouldn't even be able to build a fork without the allowence of the com.

Or let's see the commitment itself - following its rules the com would have to decide wether to set up a commitment or not. Let's see... rico!, xperis, jgobiz are pro commitment, tyndal, elpie, troubadour are against the commitment... so wie have 3:3... so what to do? Who's gonna make the decision? The community has to - forced by the commitment - but this community isn't able to make decisions - because of its different members.

I guess people are equal and free. Devs should have the same rights as the community.
rico!s vision may show a way -  but devs are doing a great job, they worked hard to get my trust - now i trust them no matter where they will lead us. On the way they show us i am willing to support them as good as i can.

"rules" and "freedom" are hard to combine - i believe in the community, they want freedom, they will act to keep this freedom alive, they don't need rules for that. That would be real freedom (or is it called anarchy?  )

Nothing against you, rico!, just my point of view.

tyndal

[jgobiz]

I guess people are equal and free. Devs should have the same rights as the community.
rico!s vision may show a way -  but devs are doing a great job, they worked hard to get my trust - now i trust them no matter where they will lead us. On the way they show us i am willing to support them as good as i can.

"rules" and "freedom" are hard to combine - i believe in the community, they want freedom, they will act to keep this freedom alive, they don't need rules for that. That would be real freedom (or is it called anarchy?  )

O.k. Daniel, you satisfied me to "move over"

[rejuvinet]

It seems we all have a choice to make, where are we going to look for the future of this CMS. Here or mamboserver. Simply make a choice on what you know to date. That is all you or anyone can do at this time.

Sadly, TJay, that's a choice we - as a community - have been forced into.  And it's a choice that is completely unfair to thrust on a community without warning.

Personally, I back the devs - it's the project THEY built that is what we all use and what we're all here for.  Nothing Miro could come up with would compare in future versions (they're too busy ignoring the community's wants/needs)....

But like I posted on the *other* forum, there's more to Mambo than just lines of code.  Mambo isn't just an award-winning CMS, it's a global neighborhood (to borrow a phrase from Stingrey).  It's US - the community, the end-users, and the 3PDs...  Without us, the devs wouldn't have anything to work on, and Miro wouldn't be trying to wrest control of Mambo.

And that's the point everyone is missing - the community is largely being ignored in all of this, and it's US that made Mambo what it is...  Instead we're being forced to "make a choice", and speaking only for myself, making a choice like this is NOT why I got involved with Mambo 3-4 years ago.

I loathe what Miro did - they handled all of this very poorly.  But there's more to Mambo than just lines of code, and it seems that's falling on deaf ears on both sides - intentional or not....  None of us should HAVE to make a choice, and I hope cooler, more level heads will start prevailing on both sides and something can be put into motion to reunite Mambo as one whole piece again. 

I hope just one person from each side will recognize there is a user base at stake here - that Mambo is more than just code, money, egos, awards, and every other stigma and compliment attached to this project - and will do what it takes to restore OUR community and why we're all here.

[CE5_Agent]

Very well said, couldn't express it better myself.

NOW LETS GET BACK TO WORK THE COMMUNITY WILL THRIVE REGARDLESS OF WHAT MAMBO DOES LETS FORK THIS BEAST A GIVE MIRO A NIGHTMARE, BOTTOM LINE -MAJORITY RULE. WHAT THE COMMUNITY SAYS AND DOES GOES NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND.

[CE5_Agent]

I WILL DONATE 50MB TO HOST THE FORK FOR DOWNLOADS AS A MIRROR OFF OF SOURCEFORGE WE CAN EVEN FORK IT INTO MULTIPLE PARTS EACH GEARED TWORDS A DIFFRENT WEB SERVICE OR DISPLINE, AND SET A DATE TO REJOIN OUR EFFORTS.

IT'S TIME WE START GOING AFTER THE BIG FISH LIKE CNET, GOOGLE, AND YAHOO. WITH OVER A THOUSAND MAMBO INSTALLATIONS WE CAN SWARM THE BIGGER FISH HOW DOES A MOSGRID SOUND?

[CE5_Agent]

Think about it with a thousand or more database servers running mambo Google would have one hell of a time financing a terascale grid that we can do for free. Even a couple megs each would make google's search engine look like drop in the bucket! Who wants to help?

[CE5_Agent]

I wrote desktop applications for years we will also need a version control system so that all of our efforts will be incompatible with Miro's goals.

[CE5_Agent]

Honestly guys and gals Miro doesn't give us access to their commercial code so why should we develop components and modules for their sole profit? It's time to wake up an smell the coffee.

[whiteboxlabs]

I see a community being destroyed
I see people beign banned and posts deleted
I see a group of dedicated people taking a great deal of hardship to keep this going as os
I see a community getting behind the devs


no we dont need no stinking foundation, if you want one they have one for ya

Perfectly said... If you think Miro is right, then go to the foundation and have a blast!

Not that anyone cares, but I am voting for moving forward from here.

Forget Miro.. if they cannot see how HUGE of a blunder all this rubbish has been, they will never listen to or understand the entire concept of Open Source.

I totally agree with the devs... open source matters.  They took it and took it and took it, until they decided not to take it anymore.

Bottom line.... Miro realized wht a great product MOS had become and "thought" they could strong arm their way back into power for control and profit... they "thought" the community would just have to take it.

Well, guess what.. they thought wrong.  And won't back up and admit the mistake and the arrogance with which they approached the whole thing.  And that is fine... it is a free world!

So just move on!

If you like Miro, then join their puppet foundation.

[rejuvinet]

If I could make a simple - yet very obvious - suggestion...  Rather than slogging one side or the other, and placing blame everywhere, wouldn't it make more sense to *try* and get both sides talking again and making Mambo whole?

I understand the resentment against Miro - I am pretty cheesed off at their totalitarian approach to this whole thing too, not to mention their blatant disregard for this very community that made Mambo what it is today.  But that's the whole point, isn't it?

When Connolly pulled his garbage, everyone was backing Miro and the devs tooth and nail...  Now that Miro's pulled a HUGE public relations blunder everyone has to turn their backs on them?  Mistakes are made - big deal.  Talk it over, work it out, and get MAMBO put back together.

I know it's only MY opinion - and I'm probably alone in this - but I've said it before and I'll say it again:  Mambo is more than just code, money and egos.  Let's get right to the bare bones of this whole issue, hash it out, come to an agreement EVERYBODY can live with (devs, Miro AND the community) and move on...

We survived the Connolly fiasco - we can survive this too.  It's not to late.  But we'll only keep Mambo alive if WE as a community let it live.  Forget the differences between Miro and the devs, for just a moment.  Realistically, they are not the reason we all embraced Mambo - it's what the project started as and what we, as a community, made it to be - whether it be 3PD contributions, posts in the forums, suggestions in the WishList, etc...

The devs listened, and with their extraordinary talent gave us what we wanted.  For that they DESERVE the outpouring of support they enjoy.

Miro ignored us, made us out to be insignificant, and for that they deserve the scorn they receive.

But this is our chance to MAKE them realize Mambo is more than just them - I think we're squandering that opportunity, and creating more work than what's necessary.  The infrastructure is already in place - and it took years to get it to this point.  Now it all has to be done over again in such a short amount of time?

It'd be less work, and more productive in the long run, to revisit the issue with level heads and try to work out something that's good for MAMBO and the community that made it so successful.

For whatever my opinion is worth - there it is...

[whiteboxlabs]

What a fast moving topic...

I could not agree more that open, honest dialogue to the goal of keeping the existing structure, teams and codebase moving would be great.

And there is something to say for Miro having a hand in the whole thing form the beginning... They have certainly invested a lot also and have a lot to lose.

From everything I can see... (and I got most of myt info about Miro, the foundation and the new dev tem from Miro themselves) is that they are unyielding... and unwilling to even tip their hat to even the most glaringly obvious facts.  They don't see they have done anything wrong.

Until that changes, there can be no meaningful dialogue.

It is not too late.. you are right.  But I am glad to see the devs moving forward in the absense of any concessions at all from Miro.

[brian]

Guys, whilst we respect that you may have opinions about miro and how they have or haven't acted, lets try and keep these forums clean of any defamatory comments.

It is much more interesting to talk about the future we have together than to harp on about the past.

Miro arent going to be reading your comments here so any appeal to them will be falling on deaf ears

Brian

[rejuvinet]

Guys, whilst we respect that you may have opinions about miro and how they have or haven't acted, lets try and keep these forums clean of any defamatory comments.

It is much more interesting to talk about the future we have together than to harp on about the past.

Miro arent going to be reading your comments here so any appeal to them will be falling on deaf ears

Brian

You're probably right - Miro won't be reading our comments here.  But my appeal is to the devs as well.  I don't *think* I've been defamatory towards Miro - I simply stated something glaringly obvious:  they ignored the community as a whole, rendering us as "unimportant" and not worth considering, and continue to do so by trying to *spin* the situation.

It's a crappy thing to do, but that's what's happened - but, and this is the gist of my whole point, it's not so late that this whole thing can't be salvaged.  At least, not so long as there is a hint on either side of working towards a reconciliation of sorts that works for both sides.

My concern is not for me, Miro, or the devs - to be quite frank about it.  It's about the end users.  It's about the community, and people who are using Mambo because they were referred to it.  I know that myself, I have persuaded at least 60 people over the past almost 4 years to switch from their existing web site solution (whether it be straight HTML or another CMS) to Mambo.  In some cases I REALLY had to work at it, extolling the virtues of how *stable* it is, and how helpful the community is, and how the dev team and the parent company *really care* about their users.

My position hasn't changed at this point - it's being severely tested, mind you, but it hasn't changed.  I honestly believe if there was any dialogue that this could be amicably resolved.  But *someone* has to step up to the plate.

I'm probably wasting my time, but many of the people I've convinced that Mambo is the right choice don't even come to the forums.  The same holds true for many other developers and designers that have referred their friends and clients to Mambo.  Why should the end-users be held hostage in a situation that could be resolved if a meeting-of-the-minds could be had?

I'm fine either way.  If OSM continues on this path and develops its own package and moves forward, it's got my full support.  I trust the developers - always have - to follow through with the community, and I'll back the new project with the same vigor I did with Mambo.  Many others here would too - obviously.

But it just seems to be a shame that everything done up to this point has to be thrown down the toilet because one side or another refuses to approach this with a different viewpoint.  The entire infrastructure (Mamboforge, CVS, roadmap, and most importantly the success, trust, and reputation Mambo has as a stable enterprise-grade CMS) is in jeopardy - it took years to build, and it'll all be worthless if a resolution can't/won't be considered.

It's a shame, is all I'm saying...

[whiteboxlabs]

Guys, whilst we respect that you may have opinions about miro and how they have or haven't acted, lets try and keep these forums clean of any defamatory comments.

It is much more interesting to talk about the future we have together than to harp on about the past.

Miro arent going to be reading your comments here so any appeal to them will be falling on deaf ears

Brian

Hi Brian,

The title of the thread is "Miro is right."  I assumed this would be a good place to look for views that are alternative to the mob that just wants to hang Miro without thinking through what has happened.  As such, Rejuvinet is correct to look for a different approach.. or possibly finding a way to move dialogue forward with Miro that has faltered to this point.

That said, I hope nothing I have said is interpreted to be a slam against Miro.  They certainly busted things up a bit, but they have a lot to lose in all this as well.

Seems to me that Rejuvinet has a good point in continuing to attempt reconciliation.

It falls short, however...  It does not take into account the previous attempts to square things away... Clearly OSM was a last resort... not a first one...

I have not really heard anyone talk about approaching 2 paths at the same time.

1)  OSM.  Great move as it *seems* we have reached an impass, and
2)  continued gestures to Miro in the hopes that a "soft answer (might) turns away wrath."

at any pace, I have moved from complaining and started looking through the forums for people to help and answers to my specific needs that arise while putting MOS into action for great commercial grade sites.  Hey.. I already posted some answers!

I have to say thanks again to the DEV team.. not only for the great job to this point, but for staying mostly above the fray.  I was impressed with the solidarity and professionalism of the letter to the community and look forward to many years of great CMS to come.

[Triplicate]

There is no point in going back to Miro. Plain and simple.

Before the split you had the Miro side and the Dev's/Community. If 100% makes up the past success of Mambo then Miro brought 2% to the table and the rest came from the other side.

Why would we ever want to go back to Miro?

Look at the history of Nuke and PostNuke and you'll se that the fork to PostNuke made a product 300% better than Nuke could ever hope for in their dreams.

The fork will easily be the same and the new name/project will be much better for it.

Miro does not deserve to be part of this community and they have contributed little yet they felt they deserved ALL the control and ALL the credit!!