> -----Original Message----- > From: Marcus [mailto:marcus.m...@wtnet.de] > Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2021 11:44 AM > To: dev@openoffice.apache.org > Subject: Re: Who moderates users...@openoffice.apache.org?
> > I'm afraid, Marcus, we have a problem of understanding what > "all" means. For me, this is the community and not a few > privileged people who are in PMC. > > I don't know in which circle you see a PMC. It's not a club > of old men > or a secret organization like Illuminati or any other voodoo. I am only talking about the AOO PMC (not all ASF PMCs in general). I had given my assessment of this by PM and I am happy to repeat it here: "a PMC of a free project should be inspired by a spirit of freedom, openness and fairness to all, and not play tactical games like a business club where personal goodwill counts more than performance." > Sorry I don't know what you mean with "inside knowledge". Some tasks > have to be handled by the PMC only (e.g., people issues, > binding release > voting, trademark) . This is the rule that comes from the ASF itself. It is certainly not a rule of the ASF that a PMC is the place to make appointments to harm parts of the (general) community by poaching volunteers from them. Or do you think I am so simple-minded as to believe that poaching D. from the ProOO-Box was not discussed in advance? And if you think such 'tactical games' are right, at least ask yourself what the balance is. In any case, my conclusion is: the ProOO Box has lost an active contributor (and there was a bad atmosphere, which I very much regret), but the project still does not have a finished flyer. So both sides (de-AOO and ProOO-Box) have only suffered damage. > Or what do you expect from me? mayby your advice as a community and PMC member on how I should behave. > When you have a topic to discuss that affects the PMC, then > you have to > talk with the PMC. It is pointless to talk to the PMC because it refuses to even question its own inappropriate thinking and behaviour and understands every sufficiently noticeable criticism as an attack and emphasises things completely wrongly as a defence. For example, when I turned to private@ a long time ago to suggest certain personnel changes, the reaction was not constructive but an attack on my person with the insinuation that I wanted to speak disparagingly about the performance of individuals. The specific comparison made to me (which I do not wish to repeat publicly here) was in bad taste. Jörg --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
