specify who we are in a sustainable manner

[masinter]

context; "the call" was a call with educopia (sponsors of the Software Preservation network) and what kind of consulting they could offer.

@rmkaplan via email:

Coming off of our call, I looked at the Interlisp web page. I see that you have a link to your page. If there are links (e.g. linked in) for some of the other people, should we put them in? Might make us look more serious.

For me, maybe the wikipedia page. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_Kaplan @masinter I can add your link, but I was thinking of replacing the whole section with the gloss from the annual report Section (toward the end): Who are we? and the "We" comes from participating in mail, github, or community activities.

The problem with a list of people is that it doesn't sustain. -- I put in the list that's there a year ago. As John Cowan said one meeting -- people who want to know can look, and decide themselves. And open source projects (like XQuartz!, whose financials are managed by SPI) what do they do?