Hi,
Paolo Vecchi wrote on 13/07/2022 16:12:
Hi all,
just to let you know that this time I'm the one that voted -1 for quite
a few reasons.
As for the LOOL archival vote, for which I refused to vote, I see
similar issues:
Indeed. Recently you already tried to reopen the vote on LOOL. You got a
reply to that here:
https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/2022/msg00746.html
You didn't reply / take notice /* it seems.
Instead you're doing the same here with another board decision..
- discussion period of 24h too short as it covers one working day
where people are busy with their day job
- Objection and comments disregarded by the proponent during the
discussion period
- Objection and comments disregarded by the proponent also in the
vote process
If the majority of the board votes in favor, the board agrees. It is
known that you are not happy here. Try to live with it and not
repeatedly spoil precious time and good will by starting debates on
closed votes.
I've tried to explain you this before. Even several times. Sadly you
didn't respond to that or just ignore and do the same again..
- Most push backs from objections coming from representatives of
publishers of their own products based on LibreOffice
Lacking any reasonable relation between the one and the other, the
decision for TDF starting to publish in the app stores is just passed,
this seems to be one of the infamous passive accusations.
- No evaluation or statements of potential CoIs have been made so
not clear if publishers should have voted abstain
To start with, this is not in line with the CoI policy.
Then it is again an statement showing that we really need to look at
that topic. I already asked for doing so at our LibOCon in Milan.
- IMHO the chairman, as director of a company publishing its own
products based on LibreOffice, should have declared a potential CoI and
Lacking any reasonable ground for that, in as well the CoI policy as
well as in practice, this looks as a false accusation and abuse of the
policy again..
let the vice-chairman deal with the evaluation and inclusions of
comments to make sure the process is seen by all as fully impartial
regardless of actual CoIs being present or not.
Here we have also the additional issue that it is not clear what we have
voted for as there hasn't been a proper discussion on the implications
of the vote.
If the majority of the board votes in favor, the majority of the board
is fine with content, discussion, information available.. (Before
repeating myself: see above for the rest.)
...
Seeing that we are in a position where we need to get together, grow
understanding, find common grounds, I think a mail with passive
accusation, insinuation, disrespect for board procedures, ... does not
belong on this list.
Therefore I really think that it is needed that this type of mail is not
moderated through.
If you would write something as
"I voted against because I consider this or that more or less
important, or .." other reason related to the content of the decision,
that would be perfectly fine to me.
I suggest there's been more then enough explanations, also in careful,
friendly, winsome ways, about your dominant style of communication?
So again, I regret that it has been moderated through in this form. I
will further discuss this in the board internally.
Cheers,
Cor
--
Cor Nouws, member Board of Directors
The Document Foundation, Kurfürstendamm 188, 10707 Berlin
Gemeinnützige rechtsfähige Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts
Legal details: http://www.documentfoundation.org/imprint
GPD key ID: 0xB13480A6 - 591A 30A7 36A0 CE3C 3D28 A038 E49D 7365 B134 80A6
mobile : +31 (0)6 25 20 7001
skype : cornouws
blog : cor4office-nl.blogspot.com
jabber : cor4off...@jabber.org
--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
