+1
Thank You Best Regards Varun Mittal <http://www.varunmittal.info> Google <https://www.google.com/profiles/varunmittal87> Facebook<http://www.facebook.com/mittal.varun> LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/in/varunmittal87> Twitter<http://twitter.com/varunmittal19> "Uncertainty is the only Certainty of LIFE" On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 3:37 PM, Narayan Aras <[email protected]>wrote: > > Hi Mike, David, all- > > The agenda has 10 topics. Too many for a 1 hour session. > (http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Website/ConfCall/Agenda). > > We will have only 5 minutes to settle each topic. > > The discussions will not be conclusive in this pressure cooker situation. > Then we will come to the "storm" (or "fission") stage even before we > realize! :) > > Having a series of calls is not feasible, as that approach needs a lot of > time. > Besides, we are finding it difficult to set up this FIRST call itself. > So setting up so many calls till we trash out all issues is virtually > impossible. > > Therefore, it is best to settle at least the fundamental differences > offline. > That leaves the main meeting to settle finer details, and to ratify what > was agreed offline. > > Assuming that we agree to use an offline tool to argue our case, the next > question is "which tool"? > > Well, the simplest tool (which is also readily available) is a wiki > discussion page. > > However, it cannot handle counterarguments that have to be attached to a > specific part of someone else's statement. Also, when in a multi-person > argument, it would quickly become confusing who is opposing whose views > fully/party/conditionally. > > In other words, it cannot create an argument map properly. (Which is the > need of the hour). > > A concept map does that extremely well. > > Another advantage of a Concept map is that it also allows us to split a > larger issue, and discuss the parts separately and then combine the > conclusions again. > > Concept map also allows us to interrelate different streams of arguments as > the plot gets larger with more and more arguments added. Note that no other > tool is good at this. > > Therefore I suggest using a concept map tool like CMAP, Freemind, > graphmind. or even brainstorm. > > Someone will need to set up this tool temporarily. > > What do you think? > > If you have any doubt, we could try out one (contentious) topic on a wiki > discussion page. > > > Regards, > Narayan > > > > Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 08:11:33 +0930 > > Subject: Re: [libreoffice-design] Re: [libreoffice-website] Re: new > features page ... > > From: [email protected] > > To: [email protected] > > > > On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 3:41 AM, Charles Marcus > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On 2011-01-17 8:39 AM, David Nelson wrote: > > >> But I see a chance to bring him back into the mainstream of the > > >> project by encouraging him (and his "Drupal boys") to take a leading > > >> role in the development of the SilverStripe website as a superb > > >> communications and marketing tool for Libreoffice and TDF. > > > > > > I also think that, if Michael were so inclined, Drupal could initially > > > serve as the 'support' backend, with its potential for integrating all > > > of the different support modes (email lists, forums and newsgroups)... > > > this would give it the opportunity to 'prove' itself (personally, I > have > > > no idea if Drupal can even truly achieve this, much less is preferable > > > over Silverstripe)... > > > > > >> I can still be there to play an assistive role in the wings, with > > >> some great ideas, too. But Michael could take on the main written > > >> content development role, working in close symbiosis with Christoph > > >> and Ivan. I feel they will have a close empathy and an excellent > > >> working relationship. > > >> > > >> I feel that this is a novel and creative solution to what could > > >> otherwise become a conflictual and unproductive situation. We will > > >> all win. Most important of all, LIBREOFFICE and TDF will win. > > >> > > >> What do you think? I am including Michael in this mail, and I want > > >> to hear his feelings on this. > > > > > > I think its a great idea if Michael is willing to take it on... > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > Charles > > > > Charles, > > I like the idea, but I think it is worth waiting for the conference > > call to discuss. > > This is achievable, however it will take some time setting up and > > configuring, and in the same time we could have all the same > > functionality as the existing site on one unified system, allowing us > > to automatically manage all of the cross links between the systems. We > > might end up creating a monster that we need to manually manage. I > > will look into the possibilities prior to the meeting. > > > > Again, it is a great idea. I will add it to the agenda for the Conference > Call. > > > > Thanks, > > Mike Wheatland > > > > -- > > Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to > > [email protected]<website%[email protected]> > > List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/website/ > > *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity *** > > -- > Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to > [email protected]<website%[email protected]> > List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/website/ > *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity *** > > -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [email protected] List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/website/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
