Hi Emiliano, On Sun, Jun 12, 2022 at 11:03 AM Emiliano Vavassori < syntaxerror...@libreoffice.org> wrote:
> Hi Simon, > > Il 12/06/22 11:17, Simon Phipps ha scritto: > > I am sorry you do not find this helpful, but being > > aware of the true history of the project (especially at a time when > > there are voices trying to reframe history) is very important and > > refusing to do so may lead to incorrect assumptions and the acceptance > > of untrue framing. > > I didn't say I found it useless, I said it wouldn't really still help > with moving the general balance of the discussion towards a positive > outcome, which was the main objections to Andreas' mails. > Please note that I have (intentionally) refrained from responding to earlier messages. But no-one (including you) was addressing the repeated negative framing of Andreas' many e-mails so I offered a contribution from experience to balance it. > By entering into a dialogue. By hearing and evolving compromises with > > other members through selecting positive elements of their > > contributions. > > I'd generally agree, but what I can read from the thread is that some > discussions and objections are less likely to be acknowledged and > recognized, and taken as a basis to work on a positive compromise, > mostly because that is not coming from a long-time contributor. I don't think it's primarily about the length of time contributing. I'd suggest the problem is more that the decision-making style at TDF is a friend-to-friend collaboration that, when there is a strong disagreement, reverts to face-to-face discussion. We have discovered over the long term that text-only discussions lead to both misunderstandings and escalation that are (usually) resolved when people meet in person. We have also discovered that text disagreements discourage participation by people who are either conflict-averse or concerned the argument is public and permanently recorded. Attempts to do what we always did in the past when there were disagreements - stop arguing in e-mail and have a phone call, and have a face-to-face if that doesn't work - have been blocked. I am really pleased to see the Board has been gathered in-person this weekend and sincerely hope you've all been able to devise ways to work together. Doing everything by text-only for two years has been extremely toxic. > That's > not the case for Andreas, who you are confirming he is akin to the > Foundation since a lot of time. > Andreas was one of the founding generation of TDF so has been involved in the project for a long time, yes. He contributed great work on infrastructure and deserves credit for it. He was unhappy when TDF migrated from Plone and I believe felt insulted by that step because his work was lost, which we regretted. I do understand that frustration, and have experienced it myself. > How should members voice their concerns when they see entryists harming > > the project and old unsettled grudges being repeatedly raised regardless > > of how they are answered? > > Let's start by acknowledging that if there are objections and they are > even consistently confirmed from long relationships and from short ones, > possibly something to discuss is there. Absolutely right. My original message however was to indicate that there is a very old problem that has not been "let go" and which newcomers might not recognise, and its repetition should probably not be heavily weighted as an indicator of the validity of the concerns today. Cheers Simon -- *Simon Phipps* *TDF Trustee*
