Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1B31295A7 for ; Wed, 1 Feb 2012 03:39:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 31002 invoked by uid 500); 1 Feb 2012 03:38:00 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 30776 invoked by uid 500); 1 Feb 2012 03:37:53 -0000 Mailing-List: contact ooo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 30681 invoked by uid 99); 1 Feb 2012 03:37:49 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Feb 2012 03:37:49 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of luispo@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.175 as permitted sender) Received: from [74.125.82.175] (HELO mail-we0-f175.google.com) (74.125.82.175) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Feb 2012 03:37:41 +0000 Received: by werc1 with SMTP id c1so724535wer.6 for ; Tue, 31 Jan 2012 19:37:21 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=qq8xgCPzp0NUFSJ/yM61ZPuSdoUMAn02F7UlVRIT/68=; b=xUv/0RvBQBQ/rjhA3csPCkQ26aJzbENZIn0S3Z+3qobMguWhJoTq/frnjJ7H1+fqAd aUlfombHHWCCgUQQ4IfvkVX3Mg544PYb37EMOLtW1fUdy/osP27tGwFVw/AUzuhjIMGP VPoKTnyXg8aspsf9j8fWJkc2RPwk3967AwwjE= Received: by 10.216.135.142 with SMTP id u14mr2125004wei.5.1328067441309; Tue, 31 Jan 2012 19:37:21 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: luispo@gmail.com Received: by 10.227.24.11 with HTTP; Tue, 31 Jan 2012 19:37:00 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <4F28A28B.1000703@apache.org> References: <6C642773-9E67-433C-B434-169FADD40EDC@comcast.net> <4F28A28B.1000703@apache.org> From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Louis_Su=E1rez=2DPotts?= Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 22:37:00 -0500 X-Google-Sender-Auth: AB8swKtYS10FnR5CU8u7l59NDI0 Message-ID: Subject: Re: admin permissions on old OOo To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On 31 January 2012 21:25, Andrea Pescetti wrote: > On 30/01/2012 Dave Fisher wrote: >> >> Is it time to remove the old OOo? > > > Not without proper notice. At least, there are still active mailing lists > there and the corresponding moderation web panels under > http://openoffice.org still work. > > Regards, > =A0Andrea. Oh, dumb me. I should mention, on this thread, that one reason why OOo had relatively many posters mis-posting messages and so on was because unlike a lot of other foss projects then--less so now--it was amphibolic user/develoeper, and that did not usually work out so well for those users wanting nothing more than the application. This meant then that so many of the rules that govern a developer site were bent to accommodate regular users who were not by any means developers or even contributors-and who had no clue, even after reading the warnings, of what it meant to send an email message to a list. I am *not* saying we ought to do the same thing here. Quite the opposite. I have maintained that it's best to focus on development and contribution here and to have a proper focus users elsewhere, though "elsewhere" could easily be within the generous embrace of Apache. louis