Hi there,
On 29/11/2022 23:38, Franklin Weng wrote:
> Believe me or not.
Let me try to provide a quick counter-balance in this thread.
It seems to me extraordinary to criticize Thorsten like this for doing
his job - in line with the best practices for communications as adopted
by the board[1] on this list.
We badly need our E-mail discussion to get more focused and respectful.
Blunt finger pointing: "I don't trust >that person<" seems radically
non-constructive to me. Surely better to work on the real issue -
ideally one to one first (or bring a friend along if you're concerned
about that), then in a larger group if that doesn't work out, before
bringing it to everyone (ideally on tdf-internal).
I would like to read a lot less E-mail attacking the person not the
ball. I'd also like to see a lot less public board posturing - it has
reached a ridiculous level.
We have a board director claiming in public that other directors
support his proposal, which then multiple directors point out that they
in fact don't, before them saying again that they actually do etc. It
seems like the Christmas pantomime season complete with comedy audience
contradictions has come early =)
The huge volume of E-mail on these topics doesn't help anyone. I think
it is safe to assume that wiser counsel is rather restrained when
sending E-mail, and that many read this and think it better not to feed
the flames - apologies if I do that here.
We elect a board to hammer out compromises - ideally these arrive well
formed and in a way that commands support or acquiescence of the whole
board. In cases where that is impossible then some split vote and
ideally a principled objection E-mail, and closing the topic seems wise.
We don't elect a board to amplify division & to escalate even
uncontroversial topics (such as hiring two staff members) into some
apparent existential nightmare of posturing to try to 'win' at all
costs. It is good to decide topics and move on.
I'd like also to try to remove some of the poison here with a personal
take on Thorsten, with whom I've worked on & off for ~twenty years.
I don't like unqualified "I trust", or "I don't trust" people - partly
because I don't trust myself in some situations[2]; it seems to me a
polarizing loss of nuance. Also - I trust even my political opponents to
be generally decent citizens. However my sphere of trust for Thorsten is
abnormally large.
Thorsten is someone that TDF is extremely blessed to have in our
community; he has contributed in an overwhelmingly positive way to
LibreOffice and at significant scale. I don't always agree with him -
and I compete with him in the marketplace (as well as partnering) - but
his integrity is something I can rely on. His patience when dealing with
controversy, his balance and desire to find a workable solution is
legendary.
More than that - we are a statutory meritocracy - and Thorsten has
contributed an incredible amount of do-ing to the project not just
coding (and apparently cloning himself[3] =) - but innumerable small
acts of kindness and nurturing behind the scenes. He repeatedly
encourages me to think that: "everyone is really just trying to do what
they think is best" when I loose faith in that. Oh - and did I mention
his positive input on the ESC, serving from our founding on the Board,
doing the jobs that no-one wanted to eg. as an example all the donation
book-keeping for many years - which was done with great probity.
Did I mention his personal investment in allotropia - which contributes
lots of LibreOffice code - this could go on and on but this E-mail is
already an example of the over-long E-mails we have on the list and I
just got started.
Let me summarize it this way: Thorsten rocks.
If anyone plans to attack and/or exclude him from TDF - they better
bring a large-ish team of people to try to replace the immense good he
does here.
TDF needs good people to shepherd the board, and also this mailing
list. It will perhaps be no surprise that I also have received
constructive feedback on improving my tone on the list privately from
Thorsten: that's his job - it's mine to take that to heart. Let me
encourage others to listen - and act likewise.
Against that - if people believe they are being harassed - they should
report that privately to the CoC committee who will investigate that
sensitively without fear or favor - there is no tolerance for harassment
no matter how senior and important the people involved.
Regards,
Michael.
[1] -
https://www.mail-archive.com/board-discuss@documentfoundation.org/msg05644.html
and I quote:
- If we should find ourselves in a strong disagreement with
another person, we make our responses to each other via private
messages rather than continue to send them to the list or the
group. If we are debating a point on which the group might have
some interest, we may summarize for them later. If we should
find even the private interaction hard, we ask a trusted peer
for help.
It seems to me CC'ing some other neutral party / peer if there is a
concern also seems wise.
[2] - a small Christmas gift for my critics =)
[3] - https://www.libreoffice.org/about-us/credits/
--
michael.me...@collabora.com <><, GM Collabora Productivity
Hangout: mejme...@gmail.com, Skype: mmeeks
(M) +44 7795 666 147 - timezone usually UK / Europe
--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
