On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 12:10 AM, drew <d...@baseanswers.com> wrote: > On Tue, 2011-09-06 at 23:29 -0400, Rob Weir wrote: >> On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 11:05 PM, Joe Schaefer <joe_schae...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> > Not everything people do needs to be scrutinized >> > to each PPMC member's satisfaction. If you do that >> > without any concern for people's emotions you will >> > wind up with more outcomes like this one. Some >> > things are better left up to people with enough >> > experience and expertise that minor organizational >> > problems can be "finessed" effectively without >> > major turmoil ensuing. Part of why I offered >> > to mentor this project was to apply some of that >> > expertise here, but I feel so far my time has largely >> > been a wasted effort and am considering tossing >> > in the towel myself as a result. >> > >> >> The forum volunteers came out, declared that they had always been >> independent of the OpenOffice project, that they had a separate >> contractual agreement with Oracle to host the forums at OpenOffice.org >> and that they owned the content. That was what they posted to the list >> [1]. >> >> Do you really think at that point, after receiving that note, it would >> be prudent to just move ahead with the migration? Is this really a >> "minor organizational problem"? Their note looks more like a red >> light than a green light to me. >> >> Right now, it looks like we're waiting for the forum volunteers >> discuss among themselves and come back with a proposal. > > Oh for crying out loud - no that is not where we are - Christian put up > a proposal - you put up an amended version on the ML - you, I and others > then worked over a few of those points all freaking day long - I thought > moving in the right direction pretty darn well, and thought it was down > to one point, that's it and even there given posts from ASF > mentors/leaders that this was all but a done deal also. > > Ok yes - I sucked in my belly and pounded on my chest..seemed right at > the time - heck it even felt good..sort of *smile*. > > Otherwise - for the most part I think we have tried to answer your > questions, to explain how thing ended up the way they are currently > structured and why and have looked for ways to fit in.. > > So tell me what am I missing here - cause it really is starting to feel > like there is something that I've totally overlooked... >
Drew, as an employee of a large corporation, I need to take those kinds of claims seriously. They are not laughing matters and I cannot ignore the claim once it has been made. However, if, on further reflection, you think the claim was made in error, or that it needs clarification, then you should post a retraction, in the same thread as the original notice. Then we're moving again. Of course, if you believe the claim is accurate then we'll need to work this out the long way. I don't mind doing it the long way, and in fact we should do it the long way, e.g., an SGA, if you think the rights belong to the forum volunteers. That would be the right thing in that case. Thanks, -Rob > <snip> > > //drew > >
