Date: Mon, 12 Jan 98 10:24 PST From: Randy Bush To: Carlos Armas Cc: Jose Soriano , Daniel Pimienta , Steven Huter Subject: Revisionist history X-Orcpt: rfc822;js@cahuide.rcp.net.pe Fake-Sender: js@cahuide.rcp.net.pe Sender: owner-enredo@reacciun.ve First: all history is revisionist. What follows is merely my revision. Second: should you wish to circulate this, I guess you are welcome to do so. > Jose has consistently tryied to erase the role played by his former > employer, Union Latina, in the creation of RCP. The Union Latina has never > had the recognition of his role as the methodological and financial > support on the creation of RCP, and indeed is not recognized even as a > founding member. As I remember it, Pimienta/UL funded the majority of RCP's creation. I suspect, but do not know, that many fundamental ideas were Pimienta's but shared and enhanced by Jose. Some late cash also came from Puliatti/UNDP. But the vast majority of pre-operational funding, including Jose's salary, was indeed provided by Union Latina. Once it was working, mid-Dec '91, indigenous PE money started to flow in. But UL and a bit of UNDP paid for the start. My email logs seem to substantiate this. > Well, generally true. But it omits saying that many of the formative ideas, as applied to Peru, were Jose's. And it was Daniel who fired, yes fired, Jose in Feb '92. Among likely many other reasons, even at that point, Jose was trying to pretend that UL had played no part. but, as usual, mostly it seemed to me to be personalities and egos. > This process has gone so far as to falsify history on the www, which is > very dangerous. My Spanish is insufficient to differentiate between grand phrases and historic falsification. :-) > The resolution of the Rio Forum contained a falsified document, it had the > signature of Jose Soriano on the name of RCP. At that time, Jose was an > employee of Union Latina, and RCP didnt exist. As far as I remember, RCP did not exist at the RIO conference. For sure, there was no network, equipment, engineers, ... At that time, it was an idea, and Jose and Daniel asked a few of us if we would help realize it. And, indeed, at that time, Jose was a UL employee. But Jose had the fire of the vision in his eyes. And Daniel had the fire of division in his. > It is mandatory for the person who would represent LA&C to have a position > of respect for the truth. Can this be justified historically? :-)/2 > have a candidate who represents the academic and NGO networks against the > commercial interest rampant on LA&C... Sadly, this day is past. My personal bottom line: o UL put up the startup cash, with a bit from UNDP o Jose was a UL employee until two months after the net was up o the drive and management was Jose's o the ideas and philosophy were probably shared. many others around the world had similar ideas then and before, just less machismo o there were/are enough egos to cover half a dozen projects o there is enough paranoia, chest-thumping, and blame-casting too o Jose and RCP have great reason to be proud of their roots and history. there is little reason to revise it. and there is enough to be proud of that it could and should be shared o Jose will make as good an ISOC trustee as any. he is used to running with no money :-). what he is not used to is ISOC's lack of vision and mission. my personal advice to js would be to work in the more fertile ground of ALyC. but js has been wise enough not to take my personal advice for a long time. randy