On Sun, 2011-07-03 at 12:59 +0800, Peter Junge wrote: > Hi Graham, > > nice meeting you here gain. > > Peter
As always, it's an absolute pleasure to see you around Peter. There are at least a few of us marketing types here thank heavens. :) Cheers GL > > On 03.07.2011 10:44, Graham Lauder wrote: > > Greetings all, > > > > My name is Graham Lauder AKA Yorick or Yo. I've been involved with OOo > > for a number of years mainly in the marketing project but also in the > > website project. I am somewhat responsible (some would say to blame) > > for the look of the present front page, (although I was just responsible > > for the conceptual elements, Maarten, Kay, Ivan and others did the real > > work and improved vastly on my original idea). > > > > I am MarCon (Marketing Contact) for New Zealand > > http://marketing.openoffice.org/contacts.html and have been since 2004 > > or so, (I'm not good with specific dates). > > > > I am a software trainer to Enterprise specialising in OOo and OSS on the > > desktop for Front Office End Users I would like to be able to say that > > this keeps me fully occupied but unfortunately that would be a > > garnishing of the truth that would stand little scrutiny and so one must > > whore oneself at other less meaningful work in order to do the real work > > when the opportunity arises. > > > > Previous to OOo I was CEO/MD of my own company for 15 years, retiring in > > 2003. (I should add: a retirement which only managed to last 4 years!) > > > > I was ambivalent at the beginning of the the Oracle gift to Apache > > process. I remained with OOo post the LibreOffice fork because I > > believe that the fork in the initial stages was done more for control > > than anything else and that was born out of frustration in the community > > and a distrust of Oracle's motives with regard to the future of OOo. > > Distrust that would at first, seem to have a reasonable basis given > > later actions and statements. Then reinforced with the gift in concert > > with IBM. I also didn't think that all the avenues within the existing > > project had been exhausted sufficiently to warrant dividing the > > community. Having said that I was not involved at the heart of the > > decision making process that led to LO so I may be incorrect in my > > assumptions and it is true that now the LO community feels they are the > > authors of their own destiny, something that they have never felt in the > > past, even under Suns time. > > > > However I am committed to the long term existence of OOo, thus the > > reason I put my hand up early here. > > > > My hope is that the reasons that the LibreOffice fork happened don't > > rear their ugly heads here. I noted an earlier email exchange with Rob > > Weir where he was denying IBM corporate power in the project. I would > > point out that this is a meritocracy and the currency in a meritocracy > > is time. If IBM (or any Corporate) allows employees to contribute on > > company time then that, in a meritocracy, gifts power to the corporate > > employees and therefore to that corporate because they are unlikely to > > step off the corporate line on Company time and certainly are not going > > to do anything that could be construed as against the companies > > interests. > > > > So the question is: Will decisions be made at IBM that will translate > > into fait accompli in OOo simply because the IBM members of the > > community have been given the time to contribute to Apache, above and > > beyond those of us who can afford only a number of hours outside of work > > time? > > > > Time equals power in a meritocracy. > > > > Now having said all that, Corporate contribution is the reason I > > remained with OOo. I have always held the belief that a project the > > size of OOo is best held in a corporate/community partnership. SUN's > > stewardship wasn't perfect but it had a hell of a lot going for it and I > > believe it was developing further and further to more community based > > decision-making, so it's good to see the old SUN name's popping up on > > the lists. > > > > For the future I would like to see a reconnection with the LO people. > > LibreOffice however, will continue to grow because the community feels > > it has control and there are trust issues with IBM. As someone remarked > > on an LO maillist: Who stands to benefit the most from an OOo with an > > Apache License, and who stood up first waving a carefully crafted press > > release. (They took previously, under the old SISSL and contributed > > nothing back.).... so I can understand the suspicion. > > > > We in the OOo community have swallowed the bitter pill where a > > benevolent organisation is corrupted by a corporate to their own ends, > > all within that organisations rules. I hope it doesn't happen here. > > > > However I view the future with a positive outlook and I look forward to > > this new iteration of OOo and will do everything possible to aid in it's > > growth. > > > > > > Cheers > > GL -- Graham Lauder, OpenOffice.org MarCon (Marketing Contact) NZ http://marketing.openoffice.org/contacts.html OpenOffice.org Migration and training Consultant.
