On Sat, 2005-10-22 at 13:22 +0200, Charles-H.Schulz wrote: > Actually, I was not criticizing the Fellowship or its concept. If you, > as you rightly put it, describe the fellowship as a different community > from the one of OOo,
Its a different organisation with an overlapping community and overlapping interests. Rather like when people from other organisations such as Linspire have discussed things of common interest on the lists. > then this list is not appropriate for such > discussion. It's like if the Mozilla folks were coming in here and > started to talk, order beer, and started a quarrel between themselves > :-) ... No, its like if someone who was a member of the Mozilla project who also happened to be a member of the OOo community proposed to discuss say the marketing advantages of embedding an OOo file viewer in Mozilla. I should think that would be a perfectly reasonable thing to discuss. BTW, the main points of disagreement were perpetuated by someone who is not a member of ODF. > As an > >independent group that is not specifically a subset of any other project > >or company we are in a rather good position to do that independently. > > > > > Fairwell, then. More like good bye for now ;-). The ODF organisation is an independent entity. That does not mean it does not have common interests with other groups. I'm a member of the OOo marketing project but I'm also a member of Schoolforge UK. So sometimes OOo marketing issues get discussed on SFUK lists. There never seems to have been any problem with that or the concept that someone can be a member of more than one project. > But my problem is a problem of list, not a problem > concerning the planning of your project. Maybe you have a problem, but I don't. If the subject is on topic and discussed sensibly even heatedly with disagreeent, I don't see any problem. I'd say that if someone from IBM came on the list and said I have an idea that has an effect that will contribute to the marketing of OOo it would be legitimate to discuss it whether or not you agreed with it. If the IBM person was also a long-standing member of the OOo marketing project why would that make things any different? > Hmm... Maybe it is because of the whole thread that the list grew > recently quiet? No I monitor this list all the time, and before that thread the list was quiet. The only other thread that seemed to be comparable was "It's hard to beat Office king" Now I wonder why you didn't complain about that thread given that it is a much stronger candidate to go to the social list? > But let's stop our discussion here, Ian. You and I do not want to > transform this list in a talking shop, do we? :-) Indeed not, but I do need to answer the points you make because I would not want anyone to misunderstand the difference between an organisation being a separate entity and overlap of common interests of individuals. If you want to discuss further I'm quite happy to take it to private E-mail. -- Ian Lynch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ZMSL --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
