Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2011 Archives by date, by thread · List index


The four people have been appointed by the SC. These people are not dictators, they are here to 
achieve a goal (designing the website and operating it). 
The reason we chose these 4 people is precisely because these were the people who had been working 
on the website since the beginning so yes it is meritocratic.
The team of four people needs to be in agreement with each other indeed, and they have to be 
community enablers, not dictators. 

If you feel the website is going against your judgement I would advise you to focus on other parts 
of the LibreOffice project or perhaps find other teams elsewhere outside it who would like to have 
a website done based on your opinion and wishes. Again, we're not going to restart the same thread.


Sent with Sparrow
On jeudi 3 février 2011 at 08:53, Narayan Aras wrote: 

Hi David,


For the present, you need to take account of the fact that work on the
website is currently being led by a four-person team: myself for
content, Ivan and Christoph as regards design (CSS, graphics), and
Christian. Therefore, these people have to be in agreement about the
decisions on developing the site. 

Oh so you four guys are the LibreOffice website decision-makers?

And the rest have to work as bidden, against their professional judgment?

Nice. And completely meritocratic too.

In turn, we implement the guidelines
and decisions of the SC. The SC is the final owner of the site, in its
role as custodian and federator of the community.

Therefore, no action or decisions are possible without consulting all
of the above people, with the SC having final veto.

You can certainly approach the SC and request a change as regards the
four-man team. For that, the best thing would be to come up with a
document laying out your ideas, and then to request an agenda item
before an SC meeting, so that the issue can be discussed and voted on
at the following meeting. In that case, you should be there at the
meeting, and I think you'd probably be asked to vocally present your

Is it not for the leadership to lay down the vision and drive it?
Why have this "come with your idea and let me see if I like it" attitude?
We are not even following the website design principles.
The checklist proves how half-baked this project is.

But the SC will, in any case, always be the ultimate owner and
decision-taker as regards the website. That's the way it is and, in my
opinion, the way it should be.

Is this autocratic or meritocratic?

Guys, it would be so much better if we could move on past these
discussions about the raison d'être of the website team. 

So it appears you never endorsed the agenda for the conference call?

It would be
so much easier to possibly achieve a good number of the things you
want, if we could work together contructively as a team and committed
members of the project, putting our support behind the project
governance and making a positive net contribution to the project.

How can we have governance when we have self-appointed leaders who don't want to consult others 
and a superpower with veto?


Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to
List archive:
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to
List archive:
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***


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.