Hi all,
Sorry for jumping late, I've health problems and I'm not really
available. But this is important.
Florian Effenberger wrote:
Hi Alexandro,
first of all, thanks for agreeing to the funding of the meeting. I hope
that we can go on with the process now and that nobody is upset. In good
faith, I just booked the hotel and the train, so prices don't explode. :-)
I rather move the conversation to a new thread, about the discussion
on face to face vs virtual meetings. Is easy to say that face to face
is better, is harder to justify who should be involved into this face
to face and why. Does his tittle makes him eligible just because he is
the lead, or his nearbyness is the main factor that can make him
viable for him even if he/she is not the best person just because
"face to face is better".
Well, in the past we never judged a funding request by the title or role
of a person. Sure, we checked who requested the funding, but we never
looked at titles to base our decision on. I agree that often people with
titles/roles request funding, but that's mostly due to the fact that
active people usually hold these "jobs" inside the project, and
therefore also have to request funding quite often.
From what I see, most of the active community members have no lead role
in the project. Most of the people doing l10n, QA or documentation have
no other title than community contributor but each of them is as
important as any other.
The issue I get with those face2face meetings organized in Hamburg is
that they are often organized off list. Rosana came last week with the
request of funding a team, great and nothing to say about it, but what
if some of us would have been willing to participate, even on our own
budget ?
This has already been the same with the QA meetings, UX and may be
others I forgot about.
For me, it's very difficult to feel that I belong to a community process
when I'm not able to take part at the heart of it. How do you feel
involved in that case ? It's not only a marketing issue here, but
branding is not only marketing also, it concerns the art project, the
NLC, UX also. This is something frustrating for those who are willing to
invest time and/or resources/money in a project or a decision process
and they are not invited nor informed to participate to an important
part of it.
Virtual conferencing system should be evaluated also as a tool for the
OOo project and not only on a marketing point of view. It should be
evaluated at a infrastructure level to enhance the community
participation and reinforcement. So the budget should be supported as a
community wide one and not only on the marketing one. The marketing
action here is marketing the community ;)
Kind regards
Sophie
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
