[marketing-dev] Re: Why TDF should be the place for one united Community

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Hi,

Em 25-05-2011 12:08, Gianvittorio escreveu:
> Guys,
> I am sure that a discussion in "neutral territory" can still mean a ver=
y transparent and productive conversation too.
>=20
> Louis,
> Which forum did you have in mind?


As Florian said, I don't understand why "neutral territory"? I hope we
all, users and interested about this,know where it goes this conversation=
.


> Gian
>=20
>=20
> On Wed 25/05/11 16:55 , Louis Suarez-Potts [email protected] sent:
>> There are many good reasons to have any discussion as proposed by the
>> TDF=E2=80=94Florian and Sophie=E2=80=94on a neutral ground. I've menti=
oned the
>> compelling ones.=20
>> And I also think we need to proceed very carefully here. Not only for
>> "community" reasons but also because a lot is at stake beyond our narr=
ow
>> concerns.
>> Louis
>>
>>
>> On 2011-05-25, at 10:29 , Sophie wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Florian, all,
>>> On 25/05/2011 17:00, Florian Effenberger
>> wrote:>> Hi Louis,
>>>>
>>>> Louis Suarez-Potts wrote on 2011-05-25
>> 14.33:>>> Thanks, Florian for the long message
>> :-)>>> But, can I request that we have such advocations
>> (not sure that's a>>> word) presented in a more neutral space? My
>> reasoning, besides the>>> obvious, that this is OOo-land, has to do wi=
th
>> simply having a>>> suitable forum for what is likely to be a
>> protracted and contentious>>> discussion, and that sort of thing calls=
 out for
>> neutrality.>>>=20
>>>>> I also tend to think that having focused and if
>> possible in-person>>> meetings is immensely helpful.
>>>>
>>>> as the topic was raised on this public mailing
>> list, and as it concerns>> the OpenOffice.org Community, I thought it =
is
>> indeed the right approach>> to reply publically to the discussion.
>>>>
>>>> The question I raised was not rhetorical. I don't
>> want to say "take TDF>> as is", but I am open to feedback and criticis=
m.
>> If there is anything>> that needs to be changed or improved, any
>> criticism that is justified, I>> definitely will not ignore it, but ra=
ther try to
>> work on it and improve>> things. However, I will also take position to
>> criticism that from my>> point of view is simply not justified, and I
>> think, that combination is>> a good basis for a discussion.
>>>>
>>>> So, again, my question to all of the
>> OpenOffice.org community: Is there>> any particular reason on why work=
ing together,
>> jointly, united, is not>> possible? Is there any justified reason on w=
hy
>> working under the>> umbrella of a different foundation, or even
>> setting up another>> foundation in parallel, makes sense?
>>>>
>>>> I am open to discussion on any channel -- and
>> although I think that the>> OpenOffice.org mailing lists are indeed th=
e right
>> channel to discuss the>> future of the OpenOffice.org community, I am =
happy
>> to discuss on any>> other channel. Needless to say, I prefer openness
>> and transparency,>> whereever possible.
>>>
>>> And of course, I'll support you in this discussion
>> and completely second your point of view and your position here. In th=
e
>> same way, I would be happy to discuss further with the OpenOffice.org
>> community what can be the best done to join both.>=20
>>>>
>>>> Face to face meetings are of course an option, but
>> it will exclude those>> who cannot participate, so why not initiate th=
e
>> discussion on the list>> here as I did?
>>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> Kind regards
>>> Sophie
>>>

Luiz Oliveira

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iF4EAREIAAYFAk3dItMACgkQDL3QxriScqjW/AD/XzfGPJ5q9Y9Far03M4ckvNPA
GdP1upFqanHb5db8S2IA/jsh7CsZpSctoxVdhfhp2hB5u0/1GXQxEUqCoUnbML8Q
=3DB3IB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--=20
-----------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe send email to [email protected]
For additional commands send email to [email protected]
with Subject: help