Hi Sophie, I appreciate your comment here and (with some fear) have to respond to amplify it.
On Fri, Jan 14, 2022 at 11:14 AM sophi <[email protected]> wrote: > > On my point of view, it was not about achieving market dominance but > about solidarity. And TDF has failed here, again on my point of view. > Yes, I have to agree with you. Freedom, equality and solidarity used to be the norm at TDF. Over the last couple of years that has largely ended at the Foundation level (fortunately our community still has many parts where this is not true). This has led to progress grinding to a halt through mistrust. For example, both TDC and LOOL were ended just at the point where the external conditions suggested they were going to flourish. Little has been achieved in their place as you observe, and as the tired bickering in this thread illustrates. Egalitarianism was replaced by turning inwards to fight unproductively among those privileged to be allowed information - and in the process to slander those involved before. As a result of this the Foundation has turned even more closed, with Board inflighting leaving the Trustees in the dark while the arguments went on. There has consequently been no spirit of solidarity to harness to do good outside the project. As you say, that is tragic, and I really appreciate your observation of it. If TDF is to satisfy its mission this has to stop. The new Board has a huge opportunity and responsibility to put all this behind them and lead positively. It must shun divisiveness and seek ways to rekindle solidarity by emphasizing equality and promoting freedom. This will not be done treating the motivations of some participants as suspect! In fact almost everyone is pursuing an "interest", almost by definition in a collaborative community! As Maslow <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow%27s_hierarchy_of_needs> observed, before higher-level behaviours can be cultivated, basic needs must be met - especially belonging and esteem. The Foundation needs to be more inclusive of all its trustees in its processes rather than just consulting them for votes once every two years. It needs to be realistic about the pragmatics of large-scale software engineering and how it's paid for and rein-in those trying to frame "commercial" as tainted. It has to seek ways to encourage both community and commercial activities inside its "umbrella" rather than treating some as clean and some as unclean. I very much hope the new Board will engage positively and unanimously on these things. I'm not finding the current conversation encouraging but I have hopes the new team will take a firm hold and change things for the better. Best regards Simon -- *Simon Phipps* *TDF Trustee*
