Hi Behdad,
Behdad Esfahbod wrote:
Note: this is a personal response. I may disclose information only
available to the board, but in no way any line in this message
represents board's opinion.
For the record, I don't expect the board to take a position on this - I
do hope that prominent fou
Here's a question that I would like to ask the candidates.
What do you think GNOME should do to support the
broader cause of free/libre software,
and the freedom of computer users?
___
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gn
Hi Dave,
Thanks for the response.
On 05/31/2009 03:42 AM, Dave Neary wrote:
So, I've detailed my vision, with two major changes:
>
- include foundation members in the daily running of the foundation by
having the majority of board business happen in the open on
foundation-list, including havi
Hi again,
Behdad Esfahbod wrote:
Ask them each to write to the board so the board knows. I'm not a huge
fan of making decisions based on "there are many, I know, but I can't
reveal their names", sorry.
I was hoping a public discussion would give the silent majority the
opportunity to speak
On 05/31/2009 04:27 AM, Dave Neary wrote:
It's not. But over the past year, we've got one or two such
complaints. And we have not ignored them. I don't think I have to
disclose the details. I don't see any benefits in making them public
either. Or do you mean the punishment should include public
On Fri, 2009-05-29 at 23:42 +0100, Lucas Rocha wrote:
[CUT]
> I don't see the Board as community moderators. Really. I tend to agree
> that some communication channels (especially mailing lists) get a bit
> too noisy some times. This makes some highly active contributors to
> stay away from certa
Philip,
Sometimes people say inappropriate things in inappropriate tones on GNOME
forums, irc, mailing lists, blogs, etc. Right now, the community just lets
them. We don't enforce our Standards of Conduct.
Dave was pointing out what we do have the power to do something about it. If
we decide to e
On Sun, 2009-05-31 at 07:33 -0600, Stormy Peters wrote:
> Sometimes people say inappropriate things in inappropriate tones on
> GNOME forums, irc, mailing lists, blogs, etc. Right now, the community
> just lets them. We don't enforce our Standards of Conduct.
>
> Dave was pointing out what we do h
On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 7:42 AM, Ruben Vermeersch wrote:
>
> Do we really have such a huge problem that the process of punishing,
> kicking or simply reprimand bad behaving individuals needs to be
> institutionalized?
>
> I have always had the impression that the GNOME community is one of the
> c
On Sat, 2009-05-30 at 06:10 -0600, Stormy Peters wrote:
> I've gotten a lot of email offlist about this.
>
> Several people reminded me that we have a code of conduct,
> http://live.gnome.org/CodeOfConduct.
>
> While I think the majority of GNOME interactions comply with it, I
> think it's not ve
On Sun, 2009-05-31 at 07:47 -0600, Stormy Peters wrote:
[CUT]
> But I think we are still arguing over whether or not we have a
> problem ... (and I really wish we were talking about Dave's original
> email - "what would you like to see from the Foundation" because I for
> one would really like t
On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 10:05 AM, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
[...]
>
> We are trying to fix a non-existing problem.
>
I dont know about the rest of you but for me this is a
touchy emotional subject, its really painful, and we all
did go through it before, it died with this Code of Conduct
publication
On 05/31/2009 04:27 AM, Dave Neary wrote:
In other instances, you suggested people paying a minimum 200euros of
their trip. Your argument has been that foundation sponsorship should
not cover all the expenses of going to GUADEC. You know what, it
*doesn't*. Eating for a week at a conference co
Dave Neary wrote:
I have said that the foundation has a role to enable people to attend
conferences. In the special case of GUADEC, we are very generous in
that role. But I think we've been too generous - just because we are
enabling someone to attend a conference doesn't mean we should pay
10
Philip Van Hoof wrote:
We are trying to fix a non-existing problem.
Before I started to contribute to GNOME, I had this idea of GNOME as a
Community of Angry People (but not as angry as Debian). I have been
proven wrong many times since then, but I sometimes wonder if this is
still the case
On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 18:02, Andreas Nilsson wrote:
> Dave Neary wrote:
>>
>> I have said that the foundation has a role to enable people to attend
>> conferences. In the special case of GUADEC, we are very generous in that
>> role. But I think we've been too generous - just because we are enabl
On 31/05/2009, at 6:53 AM, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Waugh#Criticism
I'm rather stunned by this entry. I don't believe Jeff deserves this
treatment, nor do I think it's a healthy thing to encourage (a quick
browse through various other GNOME contributors
On 31/05/2009, at 11:28 AM, Glynn Foster wrote:
On 31/05/2009, at 6:53 AM, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Waugh#Criticism
I'm rather stunned by this entry. I don't believe Jeff deserves this
treatment, nor do I think it's a healthy thing to encourage (a quick
On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 07:33:07AM -0600, Stormy Peters wrote:
> Sometimes people say inappropriate things in inappropriate tones on GNOME
> forums, irc, mailing lists, blogs, etc. Right now, the community just lets
> them. We don't enforce our Standards of Conduct.
That is somewhat overstated:
1.
19 matches
Mail list logo
