Ian Lynch wrote:
On Mon, 2005-08-29 at 22:06 -0400, Louis Suarez-Potts wrote:
Jean, no one is saying, least of all me, that an excellent benefit of
a hosting a booth at a conference is not community building. It
partly depends on the conference, of course. Having a booth at a
conference is fun, stressful, interesting, engaging; and the
camaraderie created there is quite valuable: I have been to *many*
conferences and manned many booths, and can speak to the connections
formed there.
As can many of us. Seems a bit of an irony that the main function of
OOoconf is community building and seen as valuable in its own right yet
holding a miniconf at DLS with a booth isn't.
But community building was not the focus. The focus
was representing OOo and what it can do and leveraging our presence
there as much as possible so that the project could benefit. Thus,
community building was a "side benefit" though "obviously important,"
to quote myself :-)
This seems to me too rigid a way of looking at things. What matters is
the outcome. If the side benefit turned out to be a major benefit why
worry if that was not the original priority? If the original plan was
not wholly successful in meeting its objectives what can be done to
learn from that and improve? The difference is one of approach, a
negative controlling view that suppresses the energy of the volunteers
or a positive view that taps into that energy and levers it.
Of course, for a conference like OOoCon, part of the point is
community building. And the community, the OOo community, is
implicated in it, even those who are not attending.
So we have all, I guess promoted OOoCon in our relevant circles whether
attending or not. That seems to be the main thing Erwin says needs
doing. Probably the most effective thing to do would be to regularly
post notices to the lists reminding people to keep the publicity going.
So why does every marketing initiative have to cease in a global project
because there is an important event taking place?
I do hope I clarified things.
Hmmm....
Cheers,
Louis
The great amount of attention on OOoCon, RegiCon and WhatHaveYouCon
would be better spent generating networks and coordinating
communications outside The Little OOo Black Box to mainstream
publications, schools and universities who do not know OOo exists. While
there are pockets of enlightened folks doing things effectively, the
lists are drawing attention toward activities that are not effective for
the what OOo is good for -- helping normal people replace a very bad vendor.
The idea of cultivating developers for OOo -- given that the licenses
are repellant to developers who are not corporations -- is like pouring
dust on a dried out plant with hopes of reviving it.
I fear this is what Sun/Microsoft want of OOo, to leave room for the
StarOffice brand, but sadly this is a self-immolating strategy. It is
one reason why GPL'ing and restructuring the project through a
foundation may be the only way to make it effective again. Look at the
release slippage; look at the code bloat; look at the forks producing
redundant effort; look at Firefox pulling away.
I hope describing these serious and fundamental problems, places this
thread in the StrangeLovian light it belongs.
As Louis says, "Cheers"
-Sam
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
