openoffice-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Terry Ellison <>
Subject Re: Dissatisfaction amongst the community admins, moderators and volunteers
Date Sun, 04 Sep 2011 15:21:54 GMT
Rob, the volunteers on the forums want to keep providing a service for 
all OOo end-users that they can take pride and dignity in.  That's all.  
The debating style here can be robust and sometimes falls far below the 
standard that we expect participants to follow.  
(The English version)

Many people are unwilling to be (what they view as ) attacked this way 
on a DL that can go to 100s of recipients.  This "Apache way" might work 
for a group of largely US and nearly all English 
first-tongue/fluent-speaking software developers, but the approach 
doesn't work for other communities and cultures.  It really needs to be 
more flexible if Apache wants to move beyond this base.

I agree that a fully open model can work.  I am an active Wikipedian and 
it works there, but the collaborative vehicle -- an overloaded wiki 
model -- if just so much more flexible than using 1980s-style plain-text 
email.  Also the Policies and Guidelines are strictly policed: you can 
hide your email address, and users who break the rules are admonished or 
blocked.  Here once you speak out you are putting out an Email address 
and on which you be harassed thereafter.

I will quote one of my responses on these thread -- that those with CV 
rights can check:

    * Re: Status: Preservation/Migration with Apache

> To be honest, I think that the best think for all would be for Apache 
> to accept that a user-facing service is very different from 
> interacting with developers and show us a little toleration. I think 
> most of us would prefer the Apache route or maybe a LibO route if we 
> could keep the forums running smoothly.
> In my view the crazy thing is that this type of service could be 
> incredibly useful for other Apache projects. Our model is designed to 
> scale and we could just as easily add and run a forum to support 
> another Apache project as we could another National Language for OOo.
> I continue to wish for the best, but I am not hopeful. If this would 
> all settle down then I would consider re-engaging. But whether we go 
> or stay is really a consensus decision for this community to make. I 
> just don't want to be portrayed as the "leader of the rebellion".
> However, I need my month in Greece to regain my sense of peace and 
> harmony, before I take on anything else relating to OOo or any other 
> major project.

I am not going to try to speak for them.   I would suggest that if you, 
who are seen as the main spokesperson for the "hard Apache line", aren't 
willing to show a step in the direction of reconciliation -- say by 
joining the forums as a volunteer and listening to them in their own 
environment -- then Apache will have zero chance of getting them to 
participate.  They have tried v.v. and given up.


On 04/09/11 15:42, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 10:27 AM, Reizinger Zoltán<>  wrote:
> <snip>
>> Why you think the volunteers and admins will join to this list, if you not
>> makes any steps into the other directions?
> I'm assuming the volunteers and admins want positive results.  The
> decision-making in the project occurs on this list -- ooo-dev -- by
> participants making and discussing proposals.    So I think that
> volunteers and admins should join and participate in this list so they
> can engage in an open, two-way conversation on how the project,
> including the support forums, are run.
> Remember, I am just one person, with my own ppinion.  I have only one
> vote.  I don't make the decisions myself.  But if an admin or other
> forum volunteer is not participating on the ooo-dev list at all, then
> their opinions will likely be unheard and their vote uncounted.  That
> is why you should encourage them to participate on the ooo-dev list.
> -Rob

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message