On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 1:35 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton <[email protected]> wrote: > It does not let the PPMC members *observe* the voting and any [VOTE][DISCUSS] > however, unless they also subscribe. >
Certainly it allows them to observe. All PPMC members is able to subscribe to the list. They can also look in the archives. The need for oversight and transparency does not mean that everything occur on ooo-dev and only ooo-dev. We just voted, for example, to allow private discussions and decsions on the forums, with the ability for PPMC members, on request, to be allowed in. Subscribing to ooo-marketing is far easier than that. It is public, as are the archives. This is not rocket science, Dennis. -Rob > As one pedantist to another, I'll let you handle all of those moderation > requests. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Rob Weir [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2011 10:26 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Process for deciding on branding strategy for our first release > > On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 1:19 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton <[email protected]> wrote: >> -1 to a [VOTE] conducted on the ooo-marketing list if it is expected to be a >> binding agreement of the project. >> >> That would require the PPMC to all subscribe and it would require anyone who >> is concerned with only this issue to subscribe here. >> > > Incorrect, as you know. You can send a note to ooo-marketing, even > without subscribing. You know that. In fact you did this a few hours > ago. > > Let's put the process pedantry back in the cage. It is not helpful. > > -Rob > >> There is one place to "speak to the PPMC" in public, and it is ooo-dev. >> >> - Dennis >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Rob Weir [mailto:[email protected]] >> Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2011 08:32 >> To: [email protected]; [email protected] >> Subject: Re: Process for deciding on branding strategy for our first release >> >> On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 11:15 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> If every post on this thread is being cross-posted to two lists, why is it >>> being conducted on two lists? All it does is expose the prospect of the >>> thread forking between the two lists and turning into a tangled mess. It >>> also forces anyone who is keen on this topic to read both lists to make >>> sure that eventuality is forestalled. >>> >>> I recommend that a single list be chosen for continuation. >>> >> >> My intent was to have the discussion on ooo-marketing. I was just >> notifying ooo-dev on the proposed terms and timing of the discussion. >> I will start a new [DISCUSS] thread on only ooo-marketing and will >> send a cc to ooo-dev when the [VOTE] thread kicks off as well. Sorry >> if this caused confusion. You can stop cross posting now. >> >> -Rob >> >> >>> At present, instead of providing shelter of the ooo-marketing list from the >>> clutter on ooo-dev, this is either adding clutter to ooo-dev or it really >>> needs to be a [DISCUSS] there. >>> >>> >>> >>> - Dennis E. Hamilton >>> tools for document interoperability, <http://nfoWorks.org/> >>> [email protected] gsm: +1-206-779-9430 @orcmid >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> > >
