Hi,
2011/7/11 André Schnabel andre.schna...@gmx.net
Dear SC members,
as today's MC meeting had to be postponed again we (Sophie and me) like to
suggest following changes for the MC:
1. approve all current deputies of the MC plus David Emmerich Jourdain (who
volunteered as deputiy but has
David,
2011/7/12 David Nelson li...@traduction.biz
Hi,
2011/7/11 André Schnabel andre.schna...@gmx.net:
Dear SC members,
as today's MC meeting had to be postponed again we (Sophie and me) like
to
suggest following changes for the MC:
1. approve all current deputies of the MC plus
Hi,
David Nelson wrote on 2011-07-12 03.59:
My suggestion would be to replace the words meritocratic Foundation,
created by with meritocratic organization created by. Maybe that
that would still create the impression that TDF is already an
organization by itself, which it legally isn't.
Hi,
Well how about meritocratic community created by then?
--
David Nelson
--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive:
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 3:50 AM, Florian Effenberger
flo...@documentfoundation.org wrote:
Hi,
David Nelson wrote on 2011-07-12 03.59:
My suggestion would be to replace the words meritocratic Foundation,
created by with meritocratic organization created by. Maybe that
that would still create
Hi,
David Nelson wrote on 2011-07-12 11.45:
OK, I'll add it to the next agenda and would be there to listen, and
to present both sides of the issue, if invited. But if it's going to
be a private session then maybe non-SC members won't be party to the
discussions?
we have a public session
Hi Florian,
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 1:06 PM, Florian Effenberger
flo...@documentfoundation.org wrote:
we have a public session every week.
Oh, sure, but Michael seemed to feel that this might be better
discussed in a private session? Would that be the intention? I can
sort-of understand that,
David Nelson wrote:
Oh, sure, but Michael seemed to feel that this might be better
discussed in a private session? Would that be the intention? I can
sort-of understand that, given the kind of debate that might ensue?
I don't see why this should be a private discussion.
Screenshots usually
Hi :)
+1
to the idea of this being voted on by the SC/BoD without re-arguing the points.
I had hoped the discussion would just congratulate the Documentation Team on
neatly avoiding potential pitfalls that would take months to fix if MS used it
as a side-issue in a any future dealings with
Hi *,
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 3:59 AM, David Nelson li...@traduction.biz wrote:
I'm assuming this the item you're talking about:
It is an independent self-governing meritocratic Foundation, created
by leading members of the OpenOffice.org Community.
Why not change it to ... currently in the
Tom Davies wrote:
I had hoped the discussion would just congratulate the Documentation Team on
neatly avoiding potential pitfalls that would take months to fix if MS used it
as a side-issue in a any future dealings with them. It makes sense to use
primarily Windows screen-shots in marketing,
Hi :)
+1
I totally agree with all of that :)) It's a relief even if it's not the
finalised vote. Thanks Italo :)
Regards from
Tom :)
From: Italo Vignoli italo.vign...@gmail.com
To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org
Sent: Tue, 12 July, 2011 14:09:56
Hi :)
Ahah, this is the email i have been looking for. I really like the idea of a
link so that people can check the latest news about progress.
It is an independent self-governing meritocratic Foundation, currently in the
process of being established by leading members of the OpenOffice.org
13 matches
Mail list logo
