Re: Off-topic character assassinations - do we really need moderation again? (was: [board-discuss] It's ENOUGH!: Continued Nuisance with private emails)

2022-11-30 Thread Daniel A. Rodriguez
Previous moderation, as you named, was not based on a board decision but yours. So, whenever someone says something you don't like the shut up process appears. And that's something the people who really care about LibreOffice as a project don't deserve. Sad to say this as people like Emiliano

Off-topic character assassinations - do we really need moderation again? (was: [board-discuss] It's ENOUGH!: Continued Nuisance with private emails)

2022-11-29 Thread Thorsten Behrens
Hi Andreas, all, [public answer as requested] Andreas Mantke wrote: > I do not want to be threatened anymore by a member of the board. And it > seems also others experience similar things, which is what today's > emails from Emiliano, who is the vice chairperson, and Daniel, who is a > member of

Re: [board-discuss] It's ENOUGH!: Continued Nuisance with private emails

2022-11-29 Thread Franklin Weng
Believe me or not. It's not the only thing Thorsten did that made me lose my trust to him. Daniel A. Rodriguez 於 2022年11月30日 週三 凌晨4:46寫道: > I stated zillions ago that I was one of the targets of such behaviour in > previous term. And, indeed, it's fair intimidation. > > Also don't think that

Re: [board-discuss] It's ENOUGH!: Continued Nuisance with private emails

2022-11-29 Thread Daniel A. Rodriguez
I stated zillions ago that I was one of the targets of such behaviour in previous term. And, indeed, it's fair intimidation. Also don't think that is quite new and, related to that, what surprises me the most is that several boards has passed and no one raise his voice about that. There are

[board-discuss] It's ENOUGH!: Continued Nuisance with private emails

2022-11-29 Thread Andreas Mantke
Hi all, I stated already twice on this list that I find this form of cautionary private emails pestering and not appropriate for an open Free Software project. I didn't published the name of the sender because I thought, he got the message and would change his behavior. But my assumption proofed