Mailing-List: contact ooo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAKQbXgDKukmnBWpudiyMSWONnshOJq8PeRx27VUOXRoVvEh1jQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAKQbXgDKukmnBWpudiyMSWONnshOJq8PeRx27VUOXRoVvEh1jQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2012 08:06:48 -0400
Message-ID: 
 <CAP-ksojTnNNTvFQtiN7c6Q_H7RN2Kapq+v0_nqQukuwezBpDxQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Tolerance and acceptance
From: Rob Weir <robweir@apache.org>
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 7:24 AM, Ross Gardler <rgardler@opendirective.com> wrote:
> I move that there is no need to continue to fuel the fires of AOO vs
> LO. The PPMC is now effective at ignoring anti-AOO materials on our
> own lists. I suggest the PPMC should further silence inflammatory
> posts that are anti-LO on our lists.
>

And what about negative posts about AOO?  Shoul we "silence" those?  I
hope not.  Negative posts from users (within some bounds of decorum)
is valuable feedback to the project.  I think we should value frank
discourse about the product and where it falls short.

I don't think we expect users to be familiar with The Apache Way or
even mailing lists in general.  We see all sorts of disorderly conduct
on ooo-users, from SCREAMING ALL CAPS, to flames, etc.  Project
members, on the other hand, should lead by example, and focus on
constructive comments.

So although I agree with your sentiment here, I think we need to be
very careful when considering "silencing inflammatory posts" in
general, since a ham fisted approach would also silence criticism of
AOO, which is valuable to receive.

-Rob


> For example, a recent post on ooo-users said:
>
> "The LO guys should have thought about that before forking OpenOffice
> following Novell's siren's call. (remember the first major fork of
> OpenOffice was Novell's Go-OO which incorporated the MS OOXML
> support).
>
> In fact, it was their actions that killed the commercial prospects of
> StarOffice, which Oracle had renamed "Oracle Open Office" (without the
> .org)."
>
> I suggest that the ooo-users list is not the place for these kinds of
> opinions, regardless of their validity. This is especially true when
> they are made in response to a positive comment, which was "The main
> goal has always been to create the best Office suite possible - so
> let's unite around that."
>
> Our communities need to be welcoming. There is no chance of creating
> unity if disunity is the response. I'm not suggesting this be tackled
> onlist, that can be counter-productive too. I'm merely highlighting it
> and encouraging individuals on the PPMC who agree with me to consider
> sending a polite but firm request to stay focused on helping users on
> the ooo-users list.
>
> Ross