Re: [tdf-discuss] [libreoffice-website] [Forum] How will the forum be organized?

On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 11:38 PM, David Nelson <commerce@traduction.biz> wrote:
> Hi Narayan, Michael :-)
> The most recent SC meeting re-stated the same openess to that *in the
> mid-term future*. But it was clearly desired to put an end to what has
> become a disruptive argument backed up by what has been, IMHO,
> disruptive disinformation about the SC's stance, in a quest to
> "bulldoze" the adoption through.

You are incorrect. The development and discussions were as a result of
the official SC statement to the website mailing list:
http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.documentfoundation.libreoffice.website/592

There is no "bulldozing", simply the community trying to build a better future.

> In reality, there is a lot of higher priority work to be done.

I totally agree. The only reason people are (were) working on Drupal
was that Christian stated that people were already organised to
implement Silverstripe very quickly, which turned out to be not
factual.
Once we realised that Christian's team was non-existant we offered to
help but were turned down:
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Regroup-and-further-development-of-the-website-s-td2191011.html

> If you guys can show some patience and forebearing in your desires, I
> think you will have every fair opportunity to fulfill your goal of
> Drupal adoption at a future date - if you can concretely demonstrate
> that it is a better choice and truly advantageous for the community,
> and if you follow the procedures and channels that will be implemented
> for such purposes. But now is not the right time.
>
> Meanwhile, if you are truly interested in getting involved in the
> project's Web communications, I invite you both to work with me on the
> subject, and to actually constructively contribute ideas, time and
> written material as part of a team that has been placed, *as an
> interim thing*, under my coordination and management.

This is a very different message than you were sending the website
team last week. I respect the work you have put into the Silverstripe
site after Christian dropped the ball, however without discussion,
consultation and coordination within the mailing list as the initial
driver for community leadership and coordination, I believe you
will/have alienated many of the existing members who have been putting
their time into the project already.

The SC assigning "Leaders" rather than a grass roots effort is no way
to inspire the community to reach new heights.

> If you can prove that you truly have the project's real interests at
> heart, and that there is a genuine meritocratic justification, you
> (and anyone else) have every chance of becoming the website content
> lead in my stead, with my full support and cooperation, if there is an
> official decision in that respect by the SC.

Case and point. Why does the SC decide our leaders, this is an open
community, we should decide.

> We can arrange a website content team confcall at an early date and start work.
>
> The only condition are that:

Why would you put conditions on what an open community can talk about!?!

> - We have to stop talking about Drupal at this time, and only think of
> content and information for the LibreOffice and TDF community on
> libreoffice.org.
>
> - We have to commit to the governance laid down in the Community
> Bylaws, and be supportive of the SC in *progressively* working towards
> their implementation within a reasonable timeframe. In the design of
> the bylaws, there are mechanisms for bringing about change in a fair
> and viable manner. So, if there are things in them that displease you
> now, you *will* have the opportunity to work towards change in them in
> the future.
>
> Please, guys, put Drupal out of your mind for the CMS for *at least*
> 6-9 months - indeed, there are perfectly rational reasons for deciding
> to stay with SilverStripe as CMS quite far into the future. Maybe it
> would be a good idea to think laterally and broach the subject of
> Drupal-powered *forums* with the SC, instead?

The website team is responsible for website infrastructure, not the
SC. Decisions within the website team must be respected by the SC if
they are adequately discussed, negotiated and agreed upon.
Why would we visit the SC for permission to improve our area of
responsibility and expertise?

> Meanwhile, remember that there is an opportunity to take part in
> exciting and interesting mass media communications work.
>
> What do you say? :-) I am very keen to work with you, hear your
> imaginative ideas, and see fruitful results on our
> SilverStripe-powered CMS, libreoffice.org. :-)

We have offered, and I am sure the offer will remain open. However a
discussion about leadership structure and responsibilities needs to
occur within the website mailing list. Not at the SC.

I personally reject the leadership structure that the SC has dictated
to us until a discussion has occurred with the website mailing list
members and community legitimacy is given to the leaders and the
project.

Michael Wheatland

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to website+help@libreoffice.org
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/website/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***