True, keep religion out of the analogy equation. FLOSS and specially the ubuntu community is far from being a totalitarian, Top-down movement.
In this community we have outlined a specific code of conduct for person with responsabilities within the group. Summarized: * lead by example * do the dirty job * include everyone * be considerate * the CoC applies to you møre Our progress is as much and only as much as the activity level we generate ourselves. The more activity the more new (and old) people participates. Let's get working! R On 6/9/08, Pierre Vorhagen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > I would like to add some important details to my previously explained point. > > "We now have the heart but we need our brain"? Since when do community > projects need to determine a specific brain? The brain is all the > brains, that come to consensus on the mailing list. > > When I talk about the necessity of a core group, I have the feeling that > we do not exactly talk of the same thing... If I get this right, you > want to elect and name specific people? Open Source projects do not work > that way, it sets itself naturally... > This makes me think about a Google TechTalk I watched some time ago... > > In healthy projects, certain members will naturally fall into the role > of watching that we keep on walking in the same direction, and that > things move on... Furthermore, I am rather surprised when I read your > lack of trust in this way of functioning... In open source communities, > direction is set by all the people, following their degree of > involvement, the time they already participate and the respect the > community has for the person. It is not a chosen elite, even if it is > usually the same people that end up writing the general will down on > paper... > > With all due respect, I find the questioning of the fundamental way that > thousands of FOSS projects function not necessary. Yes, there _needs_ to > be a strong central group, but surely not an elected one... we discussed > a lot on IRC, we are waiting for Onno to report it on the Wiki (no > stress of course, didn't want to say that at all ;-) and let members > that were not on IRC comment it, to see how we go along. Then we will > move on. > That is also why we are using email. IRC is good, all direct talk > systems are good and sometimes necessary, but only the mailing list lets > us set up a real communitary project in my opinion. And as far as I'm > concerned, I don't think that the Church functions like FOSS projects at > all... > > > Greetings, > Pierre Vorhagen, > pep. > > > > > John Botscharow a écrit : >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> Onno Benschop wrote: >> >> >>> So it would be wrong to suggest that I have little or no experience with >>> Windows - far from it. >>> >> >> Well, I was basing my comments on what you said. Obviously that >> interpretation was wrong and I apologize. >> >>> Don't get me wrong, I'm not insulted in any way by your comment, just >>> that when I make a point about something, it's with a long background in >>> this industry with the experience of being a both a radio broadcaster >>> and producer, an IT help-desk operator and team leader, a software >>> developer, an IT trainer and a web-developer. I started playing with >>> databases in the dBase II era and wrote sales management systems back in >>> the days of the Summer Edition of Clipper (for those with a sense of >>> nostalgia :) >>> >> >> My own experience goes back to 1983 when I went to work for a large >> civic organization in Chicago as the administrative assistant for a >> program that coordinated corporate volunteers and material donations to >> small grass roots organizations. I have used computers ever since. The >> point that I was trying to make is that my experience and yours are very >> different and that gives us a very different perspective on things. And >> I think my experience is closer to that of the people we need to target >> than yours or many others in the Ubuntu community. A very small >> percentage of Windows users have the level of technical expertise that >> you do. And that is something that, IMHO, is something that the >> discussions on this list seem to not take into account in any >> substantive manner. >> >>> (That was a tad longer than I intended, but being concise has never been >>> a strong point - I'm working on it.) >>> >> >> I got you beat by a mile on that!!!! LOL >> >>> The other point I'd like to make is that I have to disagree with your >>> perception of progress. >>> >>> I've seen many meetings that descend into rabble without any decisions >>> being made, no common ground being reached and little or no progress >>> having been made - our 2 and a half hour marathon session achieved lots >>> more than I dared hope for. >>> >> >> It did achieve a lot, no argument there, but, IMHO, it did not achieve >> enough. I am beginning to think that our basic difference is that I feel >> a sense of urgency about this team that you do not. I want us to "go >> forth and market" - as you so neatly put it - but we cannot until this >> team has both direction and structure. - heart and brain. We now have >> the heart, but we need our brain. >> >> >> >>> The single thing I would like to achieve is that the marketing team does >>> not stagnate as it appears to have done in the past. >>> >> >> Yes, and that is why we need both a heart and brain. We will stagnate >> until we have both. And, my sense of urgency says that postponing things >> is going to hurt us big time. >> >>> >From my perception (that word again :) the team has gone through several >>> resurrections and I would love to understand what caused each of those >>> to happen - so we have a chance of avoiding those pitfalls. >>> >> >> I have a theory, but you may not like it:-) A lack of a formal >> leadership structure. Specific "offices" that are filled as they become >> vacant. Consensus requires what Max Weber, the great German sociologist, >> called charismatic authority - like, to use my favorite example. Jesus >> during his lifetime. But once that charismatic leader is gone, the >> community stagnates. until a new charismatic leader comes along, St. >> Paul for instance. It was not until the appointment of the original >> group of presbyters (bishops) that the early Church had anything >> resembling a sense of permanence. >> >> >> >>> Finally, you could think of leadership in another way, that is, the >>> Ubuntu-Marketing is providing marketing leadership by using best >>> practice and central resources which it makes available to the Ubuntu >>> Community. >>> >> >> That is EXACTLY how I see the leadership role of the team. What concerns >> me is the leadership within the team. We cannot lead Ubuntu marketing >> until we have some leadership of our own to keep us on track and moving >> forward. To use the analogy of the early Church again, Christianity did >> not become a force, and ultimately the guiding force, in the Roman >> Empire until it established its own leadership structure that existed >> outside of the people who held those roles. Then look what it >> accomplished. And for those on this team who are not Christians, every >> major religion has similar history. >> >> >> >> - -- >> Peace! >> >> John >> >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- >> Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) >> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org >> >> iD8DBQFITQ2N3oYFui6B2koRAv4lAJ9jlEJgvmJBp8ezKtPnkEufaYWg9QCg7gWU >> 36ItXhwV1gShcEAnW/wCisQ= >> =R5oU >> -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- >> >> > > > -- > ubuntu-marketing mailing list > ubuntu-marketing@lists.ubuntu.com > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-marketing > -- Sent from Gmail for mobile | mobile.google.com -- ubuntu-marketing mailing list ubuntu-marketing@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-marketing
