Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 02AA473B2 for ; Tue, 6 Sep 2011 22:36:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 24158 invoked by uid 500); 6 Sep 2011 22:36:40 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 24126 invoked by uid 500); 6 Sep 2011 22:36:40 -0000 Mailing-List: contact ooo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 24115 invoked by uid 99); 6 Sep 2011 22:36:40 -0000 Received: from minotaur.apache.org (HELO minotaur.apache.org) (140.211.11.9) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 06 Sep 2011 22:36:40 +0000 Received: from localhost (HELO mail-ew0-f47.google.com) (127.0.0.1) (smtp-auth username robweir, mechanism plain) by minotaur.apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 06 Sep 2011 22:36:40 +0000 Received: by ewy5 with SMTP id 5so2917948ewy.6 for ; Tue, 06 Sep 2011 15:36:38 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.14.14.155 with SMTP id d27mr1895873eed.189.1315348598819; Tue, 06 Sep 2011 15:36:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.14.188.15 with HTTP; Tue, 6 Sep 2011 15:36:38 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4E669D44.7060304@laposte.net> References: <4E654A51.90508@laposte.net> <4E669D44.7060304@laposte.net> Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2011 18:36:38 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: What is needed for Support Forums to be fully integrated into the Apache OpenOffice.org project From: Rob Weir To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 6:23 PM, Hagar Delest wro= te: >>>> 6) Being listed as an "admin" or "moderator" on a public-facing Apache >>>> ... >>> >>> -1. Same as Zoltan. Except if admins and moderators are PPMC themselves= . >>> They are the ones who monitor the forum, know the users by reading thei= r >>> posts and how they react. >>> >> >> So you want =C2=A0to continue picking your own admins and moderators, >> without ever consulting or reviewing these choices with the PPMC? >> >> I'm not sure that is really compatible with the idea of a project-wide >> meritocracy. =C2=A0You do a disservice to your own volunteers if you do = not >> bring them to the PPMC, show their valued contributions and allow this >> to be recognized. =C2=A0Regardless of language, you should be able to sa= y, >> in a sentence or two, what the volunteers have contributed, etc. =C2=A0T= his >> is a key role for all PPMC members, to be on the watch for future >> Committers and PPMC members. =C2=A0So I'm not sure your approach is real= ly >> in the best long term interest of the project. > > Read my comment: if current admins/mods are part of the PPMC then OK. > Who has the merit here? Isn't it the current staff that runs the forum fo= r 4 > years? > The status of the initial admins and moderators is not really in question. I think everyone has accepted the fact that the current leadership would remain as-is. The question is about how, going forward, new admins and moderators would be nominated and approved. There is more than one idea being discussed now, and more than one of them sounds reasonable. -Rob