On 4/19/12, Rob Weir <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 2:18 PM, Alexandro Colorado <[email protected]> wrote: >> On 4/19/12, Rob Weir <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 12:42 PM, Ian Lynch <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> On 19 April 2012 11:34, Alexandro Colorado <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>>>> What is your concern here? >>>>> >> >>>>> >> Rob contacted me on the matter, and I reply back into the thread and >>>>> >> now he said that nobody replied and refer to his decisions as we, >>>>> >> when >>>>> >> he is the one alone making how things are shaping. >>>>> > >>>>> > Alexandro are you actually the maintainer of the @openofficeorg >>>>> > account? >>>>> >>>>> yes I am. >>>>> >>>>> > >>>>> > If this is the case, guess we could go in a different direction, if >>>>> > not I guess the only option we have at this time is to create another >>>>> > one. >>>>> >>>>> My point is exactly that, Rob did contact me about the issue then said >>>>> nobody reply to him. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Seems @openofficeorg has 1500 followers already. Unless there is another >>>> twitter account with more followers, I can't see much logic in not >>>> simply >>>> building around this account. Just need some strategic tweets so we can >>>> get >>>> followers to retweet and get more followers. If Alexandro is willing to >>>> maintain this as a PPMC member, what is the problem? >>>> >>> >>> I have asked Alexandro many times over several months whether he would >>> put that Twitter account under the control of the AOO PPMC, rather >>> than treat it as his personal account. He has not agreed to do >>> this,so I've made a new account which I am putting under PPMC control. >>> We've had this discussion, in open, on this list. >> >> I dont remember having this discussion with you. So what are you talking >> about? >> > > In this thread, on this list and several times. > > For example, 8 days ago I wrote: > > "Hi Alexandro -- Is the above your Twitter account? If so, would you > be willing to contribute it to the AOO project, so we can rebrand it > and allow other PMC members to have write access to it, etc.?" > > You didn't seem to understand that, perhaps due to my poor > description. So I described in more detail what I was looking for: > > "By "contribute to the AOO project" I mean give control to the AOO PMC, > so we can use it as a project-wide account, similar to how we treat > the blog: > > -- Any PPMC member, upon request, can have write access. > > -- We can use the project's official logo in conjunction with the account. > > -- We would promote the account on our project's website. > > -- We would generally treat the account as an official voice of the > project, not as a personal account." > > Again, no response. Instead of giving a straightforward yes or no > answer, you changed the subject to debating support questions via > Twitter.
Which means that I want to discuss this first before moving the account or creating a new one. > > Is the question I'm asking clear? > >>> >>> I've done the work. I've done the research. I've worked this through >>> the community. I've created the account. I've applied the Apache >>> branding. I've signed up other PPMC members to have access to this >>> account. I've updated the website. >> >> Then what you mean with 'I never recieved a reply'. Rob you are acting >> on your own, and that is really not good for the community not your >> reputation of power grabber. Is very skewed the way you reffer >> yourself as 'we', when is only you acting on your own behalf. >> > > I'm not acting on my own at all. I'm creating an account for use by > any PPMC member who want to volunteer to help with this Twitter > account. I'm discussing how we use Twitter and Google+ as a project, Great but we had that already. Why are you duplicating efforts? > and I'm doing this openly on the public list. This is a topic I've > raised repeatedly on ooo-dev and ooo-private for several months. Now > that we are nearing release time for 3.4 it is time for moving forward > with these proposals. > > "Acting on your own" sounds more like PPMC members who sit on such > accounts, treat them as personal accounts, and never offer them to the > PPMC, and never worked with the PPMC to make the best use of them. > Well these accounts were long before the PPMC ever existed, and at the same time, were available for the group before there was a PPMC. PPMC can join in anytime they want. But like I mentioned, the service to handled this is no longer available, and we need to tie them to a new service. Again if all fails, you can always email me the post to be launched. I dont see a dealbreaker. But acting like nobody replied to you, is a skewed message for everybody. >>> >>> This is not about how many people follow the account. The question is >>> purely about which account can be under PPMC control and thus be the >>> official account. >> >> What you mean with PPMC control, I am a PPMC and I control the >> account. So what exactly is the issue here? Do you want to have >> control of the account? If so please say so and not act as a 'we' when >> is an 'I'. >> > > Having it controlled by a single PPMC member is not the same as "under > PPMC control". That is not what I am aiming for at all. Agreed, thats why I want more information on how can we achieved PPMC control and what is the timeframe. I thought that's what we were discussing before you claiming you never received any reply from the account owner. > >>> >>> -Rob >>> >>>> -- >>>> Ian >>>> >>>> Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications (The Schools ITQ) >>>> >>>> www.theINGOTs.org +44 (0)1827 305940 >>>> >>>> The Learning Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth, >>>> Staffordshire, B79 8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and >>>> Wales. >>> >> >> >> -- >> Alexandro Colorado >> OpenOffice.org Español >> http://es.openoffice.org > -- Alexandro Colorado OpenOffice.org Español http://es.openoffice.org
