Am 15.12.2017 um 07:19 schrieb Peter kovacs:
I am sorry for the confusion I am causing.
Sometimes I get stuck in topics, and overrated them due to an inner loop of
focus.
In this case it were to not give attackspace to possible trolls. That's why I
called it Libre Office troll feedback loop. Li
Thanks for this Peter. Let’s just focus on what we can control!
Best Regards,
Dave
Sent from my iPhone
> On Dec 15, 2017, at 1:19 AM, Peter kovacs wrote:
>
> I am sorry for the confusion I am causing.
> Sometimes I get stuck in topics, and overrated them due to an inner loop of
> focus.
> In
I am sorry for the confusion I am causing.
Sometimes I get stuck in topics, and overrated them due to an inner loop of
focus.
In this case it were to not give attackspace to possible trolls. That's why I
called it Libre Office troll feedback loop. Libre does only show up because
they use Libre f
Am 14.12.2017 um 09:21 schrieb Peter kovacs:
It is not about what we agree upon.
This is a public vote. And whoever gives a vote is deciding now.
Maybe this is an effect from trolling against us, but I do not think there is
space for public weakness or naivete. (And I try not do do both...)
I t
Hi Carl,
It is not about what we agree upon.
This is a public vote. And whoever gives a vote is deciding now.
Maybe this is an effect from trolling against us, but I do not think there is
space for public weakness or naivete. (And I try not do do both...)
I thought about putting my preferences
On 12/13/2017 07:08 PM, Peter kovacs wrote:
I am confused. There was no proper " I do not want to candidate anymore mail."
But maybe my English is not good enough.
A one candidate vote is something completely different as between 2+
candidates. Such a step should be well thought of if this is r
I am confused. There was no proper " I do not want to candidate anymore mail."
But maybe my English is not good enough.
A one candidate vote is something completely different as between 2+
candidates. Such a step should be well thought of if this is really the right
step.
Also I would like to k
Maybe not known for everyone, I want to point out the following:
Please use the VOTE thread *only* for voting. For discussions it is best
to open a new [DISCUSS] thread to leave the voting clean from discussion
stuff.
Now back to the question "Why is the vote still going on?":
I don't see a
I had expressed "concern"only to highlight it. I agree others had the chance to
express concern. PMC could have started a vote. Lazy consensus rules.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jan 30, 2015, at 4:05 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>
> Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
>> On another thread, Pedro Giffuni obse
Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
On another thread, Pedro Giffuni observed that neither Jan nor I are on the AOO
PMC.
This was already noted in my vote mail and in previous discussions. The
winning candidate will be admitted to the PMC (there are minimum
requirements but I'm sure we can meet them).
On another thread, Pedro Giffuni observed that neither Jan nor I are on the AOO
PMC. (I think technically Jan might be, even though he withdrew. I suspect he
can easily return.)
I have never been on the PMC, having withdrawn from participation on AOO once
graduation from the Incubator arrived
+1
-Original Message-
From: Louis Suárez-Potts [mailto:lui...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, January 16, 2015 15:33
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] [VOTE] New Apache OpenOffice PMC Chair
[ ... ]
Casting Your Vote
The notation used in voting is:
+1 (means I vote positive
> On 15 Jan 2015, at 03:57, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>
> O.Felka wrote:
>> Am 15.01.2015 um 09:04 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
>>> Procedural note: I didn't add it to my initial mail in order to keep it
>>> short, but it is highly recommended that -1 votes be accompanied by a
>>> brief motivation (1-2
13 matches
Mail list logo
