incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Dennis E. Hamilton" <dennis.hamil...@acm.org>
Subject RE: Dissatisfaction amongst the community admins, moderators and volunteers
Date Thu, 08 Sep 2011 02:08:11 GMT
My understanding is that a single -1 from a committer is a veto only on a lazy consensus. 
That's been rare so far (i.e., clearly-identified [PROPOSE/DISCUSS] lazy consensus thread
and watch the discussion), although we have completed two lazy consensus achievements recently.
 It is good when the subjects are clear and kept on topic for observation.  There's never
been a [VOTE/DISCUSS] on ooo-dev that I recall.  It is also easy to track a properly set-up
VOTE thread too.  (There are ways that mentors can veto a full-up ballot, but I think the
circumstances for that are quite limited.)

I think part of the drama involves a concern for urgency and growing pains around decision
processes and having a very light touch on matters of oversight.  There is no micro-management,
oversight is not hands-on, and the PPMC is allowed to work it all out for itself.  Mentors
do as little as possible to avoid interfering, as well as I can tell.  The PPMC should learn
to trust in that and similarly generous in oversight of specialized activities such as Forum
administration.

I don't doubt that it does work, can work for the Apache OOo Podling, and will work.  Some
dishes were broken.  Time to clean up, learn the lesson, and stay the course.

 - Dennis

-----Original Message-----
From: Dave Fisher [mailto:dave2wave@comcast.net] 
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 16:04
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Dissatisfaction amongst the community admins, moderators and volunteers


On Sep 7, 2011, at 3:57 PM, Alexandro Colorado wrote:

> On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 9:42 AM, Rob Weir <robweir@apache.org> wrote:
> 
>> On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 10:27 AM, Reizinger Zoltán <zreizinger@hdsnet.hu>
>> wrote:
>> <snip>
>> 
>>> Why you think the volunteers and admins will join to this list, if you
>> not
>>> makes any steps into the other directions?
>>> 
>> 
>> I'm assuming the volunteers and admins want positive results.  The
>> decision-making in the project occurs on this list -- ooo-dev -- by
>> participants making and discussing proposals.    So I think that
>> volunteers and admins should join and participate in this list so they
>> can engage in an open, two-way conversation on how the project,
>> including the support forums, are run.
>> 
>> Remember, I am just one person, with my own ppinion.  I have only one
>> vote.  I don't make the decisions myself.  But if an admin or other
>> forum volunteer is not participating on the ooo-dev list at all, then
>> their opinions will likely be unheard and their vote uncounted.  That
>> is why you should encourage them to participate on the ooo-dev list.
>> 
>> -Rob
>> 
> 
> Honestly this seems like mailing lists are an awful way to take decision.
> Someones votes will be swamped by the hundred of other emails comenting and
> flamewaring making the vote completely disappeared. We need better software
> to account this voiting, like a poll or something similar.
> We need to consider two things, what people decide and their reasoning. So
> mailing list is good to express opinion or responses. But is bad to account
> how many people actually say I am forward this or I still havent make a
> decision.

+1, they are when a few individuals dominate the conversation making it difficult for consensus
to build or solutions to be defined. Instead we went round and round.

I am getting the feeling that if someone ever puts together a concrete proposal that we are
going to need to have a [VOTE], but probably not one where a single -1 is a veto.

My opinion.

Regards,
Dave


> 
> -- 
> *Alexandro Colorado*
> *OpenOffice.org* Español
> http://es.openoffice.org
> fingerprint: E62B CF77 1BEA 0749 C0B8 50B9 3DE6 A84A 68D0 72E6


Mime
View raw message