Tolerance and acceptance
I move that there is no need to continue to fuel the fires of AOO vs LO. The PPMC is now effective at ignoring anti-AOO materials on our own lists. I suggest the PPMC should further silence inflammatory posts that are anti-LO on our lists. For example, a recent post on ooo-users said: The LO guys should have thought about that before forking OpenOffice following Novell's siren's call. (remember the first major fork of OpenOffice was Novell's Go-OO which incorporated the MS OOXML support). In fact, it was their actions that killed the commercial prospects of StarOffice, which Oracle had renamed Oracle Open Office (without the .org). I suggest that the ooo-users list is not the place for these kinds of opinions, regardless of their validity. This is especially true when they are made in response to a positive comment, which was The main goal has always been to create the best Office suite possible - so let's unite around that. Our communities need to be welcoming. There is no chance of creating unity if disunity is the response. I'm not suggesting this be tackled onlist, that can be counter-productive too. I'm merely highlighting it and encouraging individuals on the PPMC who agree with me to consider sending a polite but firm request to stay focused on helping users on the ooo-users list. Ross
Re: Tolerance and acceptance
Hi. 2012/6/6 Ross Gardler rgard...@opendirective.com: I move that there is no need to continue to fuel the fires of AOO vs LO. The PPMC is now effective at ignoring anti-AOO materials on our own lists. I suggest the PPMC should further silence inflammatory posts that are anti-LO on our lists. For example, a recent post on ooo-users said: The LO guys should have thought about that before forking OpenOffice following Novell's siren's call. (remember the first major fork of OpenOffice was Novell's Go-OO which incorporated the MS OOXML support). In fact, it was their actions that killed the commercial prospects of StarOffice, which Oracle had renamed Oracle Open Office (without the .org). I suggest that the ooo-users list is not the place for these kinds of opinions, regardless of their validity. This is especially true when they are made in response to a positive comment, which was The main goal has always been to create the best Office suite possible - so let's unite around that. Our communities need to be welcoming. There is no chance of creating unity if disunity is the response. I'm not suggesting this be tackled onlist, that can be counter-productive too. I'm merely highlighting it and encouraging individuals on the PPMC who agree with me to consider sending a polite but firm request to stay focused on helping users on the ooo-users list. +1 Albino Ross
Re: Tolerance and acceptance
On 6 June 2012 12:24, Ross Gardler rgard...@opendirective.com wrote: I suggest that the ooo-users list is not the place for these kinds of opinions, regardless of their validity. Thank you to the kind soul who pointed out how easy it is to offend in these sensitive matters. The above should have said regardless of their validity or otherwise ;-) Ross
Re: Tolerance and acceptance
+1000 2012/6/6 Ross Gardler rgard...@opendirective.com I move that there is no need to continue to fuel the fires of AOO vs LO. The PPMC is now effective at ignoring anti-AOO materials on our own lists. I suggest the PPMC should further silence inflammatory posts that are anti-LO on our lists. For example, a recent post on ooo-users said: The LO guys should have thought about that before forking OpenOffice following Novell's siren's call. (remember the first major fork of OpenOffice was Novell's Go-OO which incorporated the MS OOXML support). In fact, it was their actions that killed the commercial prospects of StarOffice, which Oracle had renamed Oracle Open Office (without the .org). I suggest that the ooo-users list is not the place for these kinds of opinions, regardless of their validity. This is especially true when they are made in response to a positive comment, which was The main goal has always been to create the best Office suite possible - so let's unite around that. Our communities need to be welcoming. There is no chance of creating unity if disunity is the response. I'm not suggesting this be tackled onlist, that can be counter-productive too. I'm merely highlighting it and encouraging individuals on the PPMC who agree with me to consider sending a polite but firm request to stay focused on helping users on the ooo-users list. Ross -- Paulo de Souza Lima http://almalivre.wordpress.com Curitiba - PR Linux User #432358 Ubuntu User #28729
Re: Tolerance and acceptance
On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 7:24 AM, Ross Gardler rgard...@opendirective.com wrote: I move that there is no need to continue to fuel the fires of AOO vs LO. The PPMC is now effective at ignoring anti-AOO materials on our own lists. I suggest the PPMC should further silence inflammatory posts that are anti-LO on our lists. And what about negative posts about AOO? Shoul we silence those? I hope not. Negative posts from users (within some bounds of decorum) is valuable feedback to the project. I think we should value frank discourse about the product and where it falls short. I don't think we expect users to be familiar with The Apache Way or even mailing lists in general. We see all sorts of disorderly conduct on ooo-users, from SCREAMING ALL CAPS, to flames, etc. Project members, on the other hand, should lead by example, and focus on constructive comments. So although I agree with your sentiment here, I think we need to be very careful when considering silencing inflammatory posts in general, since a ham fisted approach would also silence criticism of AOO, which is valuable to receive. -Rob For example, a recent post on ooo-users said: The LO guys should have thought about that before forking OpenOffice following Novell's siren's call. (remember the first major fork of OpenOffice was Novell's Go-OO which incorporated the MS OOXML support). In fact, it was their actions that killed the commercial prospects of StarOffice, which Oracle had renamed Oracle Open Office (without the .org). I suggest that the ooo-users list is not the place for these kinds of opinions, regardless of their validity. This is especially true when they are made in response to a positive comment, which was The main goal has always been to create the best Office suite possible - so let's unite around that. Our communities need to be welcoming. There is no chance of creating unity if disunity is the response. I'm not suggesting this be tackled onlist, that can be counter-productive too. I'm merely highlighting it and encouraging individuals on the PPMC who agree with me to consider sending a polite but firm request to stay focused on helping users on the ooo-users list. Ross
Re: Tolerance and acceptance
On 6 June 2012 13:06, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 7:24 AM, Ross Gardler rgard...@opendirective.com wrote: I move that there is no need to continue to fuel the fires of AOO vs LO. The PPMC is now effective at ignoring anti-AOO materials on our own lists. I suggest the PPMC should further silence inflammatory posts that are anti-LO on our lists. And what about negative posts about AOO? Shoul we silence those? I hope not. Negative posts from users (within some bounds of decorum) is valuable feedback to the project. I think we should value frank discourse about the product and where it falls short. I think it is pretty clear that I'm not talking about valuable discussion. I'm talking about unnecessary inflammatory remarks which contribute nothing or, worse, are detrimental. Project members, on the other hand, should lead by example, and focus on constructive comments. +1 So although I agree with your sentiment here, I think we need to be very careful when considering silencing inflammatory posts in general, since a ham fisted approach would also silence criticism of AOO, which is valuable to receive. OK, my initial language makes it sound like I'm saying that we should tell people to shut up. That was a poor choice of words on my part. Instead why lets focus on the actual action I'm advocating: I'm not suggesting this be tackled onlist, that can be counter-productive too. I'm merely highlighting it and encouraging individuals on the PPMC who agree with me to consider sending a polite but firm request to stay focused on helping users on the ooo-users list. Ross -Rob For example, a recent post on ooo-users said: The LO guys should have thought about that before forking OpenOffice following Novell's siren's call. (remember the first major fork of OpenOffice was Novell's Go-OO which incorporated the MS OOXML support). In fact, it was their actions that killed the commercial prospects of StarOffice, which Oracle had renamed Oracle Open Office (without the .org). I suggest that the ooo-users list is not the place for these kinds of opinions, regardless of their validity. This is especially true when they are made in response to a positive comment, which was The main goal has always been to create the best Office suite possible - so let's unite around that. Our communities need to be welcoming. There is no chance of creating unity if disunity is the response. I'm not suggesting this be tackled onlist, that can be counter-productive too. I'm merely highlighting it and encouraging individuals on the PPMC who agree with me to consider sending a polite but firm request to stay focused on helping users on the ooo-users list. Ross -- Ross Gardler (@rgardler) Programme Leader (Open Development) OpenDirective http://opendirective.com
Re: Tolerance and acceptance
On 6 June 2012 13:13, Ross Gardler rgard...@opendirective.com wrote: PPMC who agree with me to consider sending a polite but firm request to stay focused on helping users on the ooo-users list. +1 let's be the ones acting like grown ups. Ross -- Ian Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications (The Schools ITQ) www.theINGOTs.org +44 (0)1827 305940 The Learning Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth, Staffordshire, B79 8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and Wales.
Re: Tolerance and acceptance
KG01 - see comments inline On Wednesday, June 6, 2012, Rob Weir wrote: On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 7:24 AM, Ross Gardler rgard...@opendirective.comjavascript:; wrote: I move that there is no need to continue to fuel the fires of AOO vs LO. The PPMC is now effective at ignoring anti-AOO materials on our own lists. I suggest the PPMC should further silence inflammatory posts that are anti-LO on our lists. And what about negative posts about AOO? Shoul we silence those? I hope not. Negative posts from users (within some bounds of decorum) is valuable feedback to the project. I think we should value frank discourse about the product and where it falls short. KG01 - Agreed. No wrong answers. Both positive and negative feedback help us understand if we are meeting our user's expectations. I don't think we expect users to be familiar with The Apache Way or even mailing lists in general. We see all sorts of disorderly conduct on ooo-users, from SCREAMING ALL CAPS, to flames, etc. Project members, on the other hand, should lead by example, and focus on constructive comments. KG01 - Agreed. Take the high road, acknowledge input, and lead by example. So although I agree with your sentiment here, I think we need to be very careful when considering silencing inflammatory posts in general, since a ham fisted approach would also silence criticism of AOO, which is valuable to receive. -Rob For example, a recent post on ooo-users said: The LO guys should have thought about that before forking OpenOffice following Novell's siren's call. (remember the first major fork of OpenOffice was Novell's Go-OO which incorporated the MS OOXML support). In fact, it was their actions that killed the commercial prospects of StarOffice, which Oracle had renamed Oracle Open Office (without the .org). I suggest that the ooo-users list is not the place for these kinds of opinions, regardless of their validity. This is especially true when they are made in response to a positive comment, which was The main goal has always been to create the best Office suite possible - so let's unite around that. Our communities need to be welcoming. There is no chance of creating unity if disunity is the response. I'm not suggesting this be tackled onlist, that can be counter-productive too. I'm merely highlighting it and encouraging individuals on the PPMC who agree with me to consider sending a polite but firm request to stay focused on helping users on the ooo-users list. Ross
