poi-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Andrew C. Oliver" <acoli...@buni.org>
Subject Re: List of Patents required to implement OOXML (was: Rejection ofany ENCUMBERED Microsoft Donation to POI)
Date Fri, 18 Apr 2008 01:41:39 GMT
Gianugo Rabellino wrote:
> 
> Add at least another couple of people you have been talking to (I know 
> because they came to me with a "Spoke to Andy. POI, WTF?"), and that's a 
> more accurate picture.
> 

That was really substantive?  I wanted to know where your head was...had 
nothing to do with any decisions about the project.  Now THAT was my OMG 
POI is now one of those communities to be addressed through press 
releases.

>> So there is or MAY BE a patent boogyman hiding in the closet and you 
>> took his money and may not have asked for the rights to do what you're 
>> doing in return.  I'm sorry that you were sloppy or naive and that you 
>> don't see it right now, but you were.
> 
> This is a very questionable statement. You are entitled to your opinion, 
> of course, but the moment you start saying that I have been 
> unprofessional (the moment you act on your professional capacity, this 
> is what sloppy really means in my book), well, I think you should at 
> least provide evidence that goes beyond your opinion, given that a 
> number of people here seem to think that's not the case. I hope you 
> realize, despite your "email sucks" disclaimer, that words have a clear 
> meaning, and that reputation is something I value a lot. I'm not going 
> to leave this comment of yours unchallenged.
> 

Do better and then I won't point it out.

>> I don't blame you for that.  I blame you for just dismissing my 
>> concerns out of hand
> 
> I think that 52+22 messages (and counting!) are quite far from anything 
> like "dismissing out of hand". At a very least, I hope you will 
> recognize that I (and others) have been responsive to your comments. We 
> just got to a point where it's about opinions, really: a lot of people 
> seem to believe (in different shades of grey) we don't need anything 
> more that what we've currently got, you happen to vehemently disagree. I 
> do believe that, from a community perspective, you should just 
> understand what the majority is all about, and the possibility that not 
> everyone here might be sloppy in their judgement. I do believe that you 
> should revert to a -0.99, and keep pushing to have as much clarity as 
> possible. As I said, I see as a value having a pain in the backside that 
> double checks what we are doing. If you still want to go nuclear, then 
> it's fully your choice, but I won't allow you to say that (a) homework 
> hasn't been done - you just happen not to like it and (b) that we're not 
> talking to you.
> 

No.  Do due diligence or I want to do the most visible thing I can to 
point out that you didn't and I want to do the most visible thing I can 
to make sure people know what they're getting into.  Its not clear and 
that you're not sufficiently paranoid is even worse.

-Andy

> Ciao,
> 


-- 
Buni Meldware Communication Suite
http://buni.org
Multi-platform and extensible Email,
Calendaring (including freebusy),
Rich Webmail, Web-calendaring, ease
of installation/administration.

Mime
View raw message