incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Roberto Galoppini <>
Subject Re: Apache OpenOffice Project Twitter Account
Date Thu, 19 Apr 2012 14:04:35 GMT
On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 3:19 PM, Alexandro Colorado <> wrote:
> On 4/19/12, Rob Weir <> wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 2:18 PM, Alexandro Colorado <> wrote:
>>> On 4/19/12, Rob Weir <> wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 12:42 PM, Ian Lynch <> wrote:
>>>>> On 19 April 2012 11:34, Alexandro Colorado <> wrote:
>>>>>>>> What is your concern here?
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> Rob contacted me on the matter, and I reply back into the
thread and
>>>>>> >> now he said that nobody replied and refer to his decisions
as we,
>>>>>> >> when
>>>>>> >> he is the one alone making how things are shaping.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Alexandro are you actually the maintainer of the @openofficeorg
>>>>>> > account?
>>>>>> yes I am.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > If this is the case, guess we could go in a different direction,
>>>>>> > not I guess the only option we have at this time is to create
>>>>>> > one.
>>>>>> My point is exactly that, Rob did contact me about the issue then
>>>>>> nobody reply to him.
>>>>> Seems @openofficeorg has 1500 followers already. Unless there is another
>>>>> twitter account with more followers, I can't see much logic in not
>>>>> simply
>>>>> building around this account. Just need some strategic tweets so we can
>>>>> get
>>>>> followers to retweet and get more followers. If Alexandro is willing
>>>>> maintain this as a PPMC member, what is the problem?
>>>> I have asked Alexandro many times over several months whether he would
>>>> put that Twitter account under the control of the AOO PPMC, rather
>>>> than treat it as his personal account.  He has not agreed to do
>>>> this,so I've made a new account which I am putting under PPMC control.
>>>>  We've had this discussion, in open, on this list.
>>> I dont remember having this discussion with you. So what are you talking
>>> about?
>> In this thread, on this list and several times.
>> For example, 8 days ago I wrote:
>> "Hi Alexandro -- Is the above your Twitter account?  If so, would you
>> be willing to contribute it to the AOO project, so we can rebrand it
>> and allow other PMC members to have write access to it, etc.?"
>> You didn't seem to understand that, perhaps due to my poor
>> description.  So I described in more detail what I was looking for:
>> "By "contribute to the AOO project" I mean give control to the AOO PMC,
>> so we can use it as a project-wide account, similar to how we treat
>> the blog:
>> -- Any PPMC member, upon request, can have write access.
>> -- We can use the project's official logo in conjunction with the account.
>> -- We would promote the account on our project's website.
>> -- We would generally treat the account as an official voice of the
>> project, not as a personal account."
>> Again, no response.  Instead of giving a straightforward yes or no
>> answer, you changed the subject to debating support questions via
>> Twitter.
> Which means that I want to discuss this first before moving the
> account or creating a new one.
>> Is the question I'm asking clear?
>>>> I've done the work.  I've done the research.  I've worked this through
>>>> the community.  I've created the account.  I've applied the Apache
>>>> branding.  I've signed up other PPMC members to have access to this
>>>> account.  I've updated the website.
>>> Then what you mean with 'I never recieved a reply'. Rob you are acting
>>> on your own, and that is really not good for the community not your
>>> reputation of power grabber.  Is very skewed the way you reffer
>>> yourself as 'we', when is only you acting on your own behalf.
>> I'm not acting on my own at all.  I'm creating an account for use by
>> any PPMC member who want to volunteer to help with this Twitter
>> account.  I'm discussing how we use Twitter and Google+ as a project,
> Great but we had that already. Why are you duplicating efforts?

Ok, if I understand it right you're open to provide the PPMC with the
ability to control that account, that means allign the logo,
description, etc to what the PPMC thinks is appropriate, as well as to
have other PPMC members to join the club and tweet.

Is it correct? If not please ask questions you believe went unanswered.

I'm pretty sure people on this list are open to keep providing answers
to end-users, yet to make all necessary changes to have blog post news
as well as other news automated. Unless you see a problem with moving
in this direction, it seems like we are all on the same page.


>> and I'm doing this openly on the public list.   This is a topic I've
>> raised repeatedly on ooo-dev and ooo-private for several months.  Now
>> that we are nearing release time for 3.4 it is time for moving forward
>> with these proposals.
>> "Acting on your own" sounds more like PPMC members who sit on such
>> accounts, treat them as personal accounts, and never offer them to the
>> PPMC, and never worked with the PPMC to make the best use of them.
> Well these accounts were long before the PPMC ever existed, and at the
> same time, were available for the group before there was a PPMC. PPMC
> can join in anytime they want. But like I mentioned, the service to
> handled this is no longer available, and we need to tie them to a new
> service.
> Again if all fails, you can always email me the post to be launched. I
> dont see a dealbreaker. But acting like nobody replied to you, is a
> skewed message for everybody.
>>>> This is not about how many people follow the account.  The question is
>>>> purely about which account can be under PPMC control and thus be the
>>>> official account.
>>> What you mean with PPMC control, I am a PPMC and I control the
>>> account. So what exactly is the issue here? Do you want to have
>>> control of the account? If so please say so and not act as a 'we' when
>>> is an 'I'.
>> Having it controlled by a single PPMC member is not the same as "under
>> PPMC control".  That is not what I am aiming for at all.
> Agreed, thats why I want more information on how can we achieved PPMC
> control and what is the timeframe. I thought that's what we were
> discussing before you claiming you never received any reply from the
> account owner.
>>>> -Rob
>>>>> --
>>>>> Ian
>>>>> Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications (The Schools ITQ)
>>>>> +44 (0)1827 305940
>>>>> The Learning Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth,
>>>>> Staffordshire, B79 8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and
>>>>> Wales.
>>> --
>>> Alexandro Colorado
>>> Español
> --
> Alexandro Colorado
> Español
This e- mail message is intended only for the named recipient(s) above. It may contain confidential
and privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient you are hereby notified
that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail and any attachment(s) is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender
by replying to this e-mail and delete the message and any attachment(s) from your system.
Thank you.

View raw message