incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rob Weir <>
Subject Re: On parks, commons, and websites... and fun (or lack of)
Date Wed, 18 Jul 2012 15:27:42 GMT
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 10:31 AM, Joe Schaefer <> wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: J├╝rgen Schmidt <>
>> To:
>> Cc:
>> Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2012 10:18 AM
>> Subject: Re: On parks, commons, and websites... and fun (or lack of)
>> If Hagar really step back and won't continue his great job it will be a
>> big lost. We appreciate your work and what you did for the
>> infrastructure, the CMS and everything else you do here or for other
>> projects. But in this special case you completely failed and it is even
>> more worse because you are a mentor. I am sure that nobody in this
>> project (excepting other mentors who are surprisingly quite) support
>> what you have done or better how you have tried to address this. But I
>> hope that you have learned your lesson as well from this.
> Let's explore this then, because I don't see why I should feel intimidated
> by how someone might respond to a challenge to do more.  Here is how my
> original email in this thread described Hagar's "behavior":
>     "Other citizens might see the trash but instead of tackling the problem
>     themselves, ask another park visitor to clean it up.  Not a bad thing
>     to do, but a little bit imposing on the other visitors of the park.
>     Those people might wonder about why the original citizen did not clean
>     up the trash themselves, but occasionally you come across citizens
>     who are happy to just honor the unusual request without issue."
> I fail to see how describing Hagar's behavior as "not a bad thing to do"
> should trigger a drastic action from Hagar like resigning his responsibilities
> from this project.  He seems to be reading far more into what I've written,
> and no this thread wasn't meant to be primarily about him at all.

Hi Joe,  I think that any calm, deliberate, factual analysis would
come to a similar conclusion.  But in this case I think it was more a
matter of tone and other intangible aspects of the post.    When I saw
your original note -- which was a week ago -- I cringed, like when
hearing a bad note in an orchestra.

But just like in an orchestra, we need to all just play on.  If it
turns into a long debate about who played the wrong note and why and
whether it was even really a bad note -- nothing good comes from this.
The time wasted on this is time we should be spending on playing the
next note.

The weird thing here is that your original note was a week ago.
Ordinarily I'd expect that emotions would cool down, and any perceived
affront would diminish over time.  But in this case a week passes and
we have a resignation.  That is odd to me.

The failure here, IMHO, is that we're not thinking broadly enough to
accept two assertions simultaneously:

1) That Joe is right in pushing for more people, especially AOO
committers, to help maintain the website


2) Hagar is right in believing that he is a volunteer and can do as
much or as little as he pleases


A) Someone reporting a website defect does some good for the project,
even if they don't take the extra step of fixing the defect themselves


B) Someone encouraging others to use the CMS to fix website defects
themselves is doing good for the project, even if occasionally there
are some who do not want to use the CMS

Both statements are true.  They are not in conflict.  If we
acknowledge both as true, I don't see the remaining issue.


View raw message