Hi Martin, *, this is in response to your blog post here:
http://blogs.sun.com/ratte/entry/openoffice_org_product_development (I'll separately post a blog entry about this, but would prefer discussion on this mailing list) You wrote: > The only candidate now for the non-code contributing projects for the > next round of council elections will be Thorsten Behrens. he's a well > known great supporter of the hacker driven "Product Development", from > my perspective a good representative of the code contributors. But not > for the non-code contributing PD projects of OOo as the charter of the > CC states. It's difficult to do a "no" vote against the only candidate > for this seat, especially if the candidate does good things for the > project and I consider him as a good friend of mine. But we need a > general review of the PD part of the project, and therefore I want to > see a person representing the classical school of product development > and call for a no-vote and call for new candidates. > Martin, so do you really think someone capable of working on the strategic marketing plan will have _more_ time doing so when being a member of the CC? ;) More seriously, and as I wrote in my intro mail, I firmly believe that CC's central function is arbitration - i.e. talking to people, convincing folks, finding compromise. It's decidedly not the place to vote people into, because you need specific jobs A, B, or C done - that's what the different projects are for, for your example the marketing project. My selling point is surely not decades of marketing experience, but rather my ties into the wider community, for which I know very many people in person, and would call quite a few of them friends. I've done QA work on CWS & sponsoring a tinderbox, I know a fair bit about the economies & strategies in FLOSS communities - and I do my legwork in advertising OOo, e.g. at CeBIT. As stated in my introduction mail, I'm explicitely running for this seat representing projects outside of raw code contribution in the council - in fact, I've always frowned upon the notion of being purely "code contributor", "qa engineer", or "marketer" - core to my motivation is my love for this project, that is OOo, and everything that's necessary to further its success. Across all camps. And finally, I find the act of lobbying for a "no" vote against a CC candidate quite without precedent, even more so since there was not even a single question, neither public nor privately, about my intentions or motivations, let alone a discussion. I can only ask everyone involved to check the facts objectively, and keep up with the tradition of having the CC be a place of collaboration & compromise, instead of exclusionism & camp mentality. Regards, -- Thorsten
pgphh8JNGVzPX.pgp
Description: PGP signature
