-----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 very > transparent and productive conversation too. > > 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 > > > On Wed 25/05/11 16:55 , Louis Suarez-Potts lsuarezpo...@gmail.com sent: >> There are many good reasons to have any discussion as proposed by the >> TDF—Florian and Sophie—on a neutral ground. I've mentioned the >> compelling ones. >> 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 narrow >> 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 with >> 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.>>> >>>>> 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 criticism. >> If there is anything>> that needs to be changed or improved, any >> criticism that is justified, I>> definitely will not ignore it, but rather >> 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 working >> together, >> jointly, united, is not>> possible? Is there any justified reason on why >> 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 the 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 the >> same way, I would be happy to discuss further with the OpenOffice.org >> community what can be the best done to join both.> >>>> >>>> Face to face meetings are of course an option, but >> it will exclude those>> who cannot participate, so why not initiate the >> 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 =B3IB -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- ----------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe send email to dev-unsubscr...@marketing.openoffice.org For additional commands send email to sy...@marketing.openoffice.org with Subject: help
