Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2013 Archives by date, by thread · List index

He is surely renting hosting space from some company, and surely they possibly have the means to assist in the day to day maintenance, i.e fixing common issues, running tasks and housekeeping not involved in probing into restricted parts of the web pages, flagging him of web issues, which he deems private (only he can access and work with) content, issues such as spam, and blocking it.

Really, so easy to resolve even if one does not have time for a supposedly public web space.

Andrew Brown

On 15/08/2013 02:00 PM, Tom Davies wrote:
Hi :)
I've not been a long term user (or contributor) of the site but i agree with Dave Barton about this.

Maybe if a one or 2 of us could approach the owner?  Let him know there might be a way for him to 
retain control but also make it easier for him to manage?  It sounds like a simple day-to-day chore 
took down the website and that could be taken care of by someone or some organisation he could 
delegate that sort of thing too?

Regards from
Tom :)

From: Dave Barton <>
Sent: Thursday, 15 August 2013, 12:40
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] shifting focus to licencing

Nino Novak wrote:
Am 14.08.2013 18:39, schrieb Dave Barton:
Andrew Douglas Pitonyak wrote:
On 08/13/2013 02:32 AM, Dave Barton wrote:
1. The independent "unofficial" one Jim was
referring to. For reasons nobody has been able to explain, their server
is at best unreliable and frequently times out.
oooforum was setup and is controlled by a single very busy person with
no help from anyone else in any way. So, it uses resources available to
this person and is maintained by this person. The other forum is
maintained by a group of volunteers so there are more people to fix it.
so this looks to me like people have contributed to a site which took
their knowledge but later did (or does) not present it back to the
public in a satisfactory way.
Based on my years of experience as a user of the site, I seriously doubt
that this was/is the owner's intention.

Two thoughts:

1 - Does the owner sufficently understand the public need for high
availability of the forum's content?
I am convinced that he does. The problem appears to be twofold:
   1. His personal workload prevents him from giving sufficient attention
to server administration and spam elimination.
   2. His reluctance to accept much (if any) outside assistance.

2 - How is the forum's content licenced?
I have never found any notice on the site to indicate what the content
licence is. IANAL, but the absence of such I notice and no mention of
content licensing in the "Registration Agreement Terms", would lead me
to believe the content is public domain, just like this email.

The good news is that the site is currently accessible, albeit with the
usual amount of spam adorning the main page.


To unsubscribe e-mail to:
Posting guidelines + more:
List archive:
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

To unsubscribe e-mail to:
Posting guidelines + more:
List archive:
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.