That was not my intention, Rob. I had no idea there was discussion at <http://user.services.openoffice.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?f=49&t=45224>. All I provided was a notice.
My message was to advise Forum readers, especially the volunteers of the fact that the [VOTE] was happening here. I am aware that some of the forum folks avoid sipping in the ooo-dev fire hose and wanted them to know there was a topic of likely interest. This is not where I originally posted the message, and I failed to see that it ended up in the General area. I did not notice that thread and had no idea that there was discussion there. I see this is no different than if there had been a blog post and folks started coffee-housing via comments rather than acting on the information as given. And, indeed, the discussion there was certainly whatever Forum users chose to discuss among themselves, relating to appraisal of how the Podling seems to operate, discomfort of various kinds, and so on. It is not as if any independent poll was happening there. It was more back-channel. The only difference about this particular back-channel is that it was on a public Forum. Also, Shane Curcuru did offer correction to some of the misunderstandings about the voting itself. The only error I see is that I did not pay attention to where my post had been moved and I did not assist by responding to some of the questions. Thanks for pointing this out. I have added some clarifications and a summary of the outcome. Next time I will be more attentive, especially to providing information on how to participate on ooo-dev for a limited purpose or generally. You'll notice from the [VOTE][RESULT] tally that Forum participants did indeed participate. I find that gratifying. - Dennis -----Original Message----- From: Rob Weir [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2011 05:43 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [DISCUSS]+[VOTE] Trademark and Branding I just noticed that Dennis started an independent discussion thread on the branding vote on the forums: http://user.services.openoffice.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?f=49&t=45224 Although it had the best intentions, the thread quickly degenerated into discussions on how to vote without subscribing to to ooo-dev, complaining about Apache and the Apache Way, and personal attacks, But most of all, the thread was entirely ineffective. Although it may have triggered a few additional votes, by having this fragmented discussion in an obscure forum thread which is never seen by the vast majority of the PPMC, it had almost zero influence on anyone else's opinions. There is a reason why we have a [DISCUSSION] thread on ooo-dev in parallel to a [VOTE] thread. This is so you can make an argument for your position and potentially persuade others. So I'd urge, in the future, if there is a community-wide discussion or vote, to come to where the core discussion and vote is occurring and make your views know here. You can always unscubscribe to the list after the vote if you have no further interest. Regards, -Rob On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 10:35 PM, Donald Harbison <[email protected]> wrote: > We've had a lengthy discussion on ooo-marketing regarding trademark and > branding considerations and options. It's time we moved forward and made a > decision in order to expedite the ongoing migration of the web site and to > remove one more obstacle from the dev team. > > We want to preserve and protect the historic OpenOffice.org trademark. The > choice of an Apache name and new trademark will not impact the historic > mark as granted to the Apache Software Foundation for stewardship. > > Since this is a major decision we felt it important to bring it back to > ooo-dev for final discussion then vote. We have the choices presented on > the wiki[1] for your reference. > > [1]https://cwiki.apache.org/**confluence/display/OOOUSERS/** > Branding+Planning<https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Branding+Planning> >
