openoffice-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rob Weir <>
Subject Re: An example of what's wrong up with the wiki
Date Sun, 07 Aug 2011 17:45:05 GMT
On Sun, Aug 7, 2011 at 1:11 PM, Michael Stahl <> wrote:
> On 07.08.2011 18:30, Rob Weir wrote:
>> As mentioned before I'm concerned with the concentration of power on
>> the wiki, with a few moderators/admins having arbitrary power over
>> content, even though they have not signed the iCLA, are not committers
>> and have not been appointed by the PPMC.  So there is arbitrary
>> authority, with no accountability.  Having a system like this
>> abdicates the PPMC's responsibility for providing oversight to our
>> Apache-hosted project websites.
>> I posted a new FAQ on the wiki today.  This was to demonstrate that
>> anyone could post anything on the wiki, under any license.
>> The post was quickly taken down and my account was permanently
>> blocked.  This was done by someone who is not a PPMC member. In fact
>> this was a person who recently announced that he was leaving the
>> project because they had no time to participate.  But evidently there
>> is no process for removing someone's super-user permissions once they
>> claim to have left the project.   There was no discussion on the
>> ooo-dev or ooo-private about the content removal.  Nor was there any
>> discussion of the account ban.  It was just done.
> i can't figure out how to look at what exactly you added to the wiki, but if
> you really added a demand of payment in livestock to the page then i
> consider such handling of obvious attempts at vandalism entirely
> appropriate, and i am happy that we have somebody who looks after these
> things.

The contribution I made was original and was made under my copyright.
The contribution was entirely in conformance with the terms dictated
by the wiki page itself for contributions:

"You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it
from a public domain or similar free resource (see
Wiki:Copyrights for details). Do not submit copyrighted work without

I did put additional restrictions on copying and translation of the
contribution.  Many other contributions to the wiki have restrictions
on derived works, as dictated by their license.  The fact that use in
derived works required payment in the form of livestock is not
relevant to whether the contribution should be immediately deleted,
without discussion or review, and the contributor's account blocked.
That is, unless we think that admins should be interpreting and
enforcing license policies that go beyond those stated on the wiki

>> This is not how Commit Then Review works at Apache.   This proves my
>> point that we need to have all wiki users with permissions over other
>> users to be Committers.  Only committers should have the ability to
>> revert content made by other committers.  And this should only be done
>> with discussion.
> in general i'd agree that being a Committer is an advantage for
> administrative duties, but of course it depends on finding enough Committers
> with sufficient time available to react to Wiki vandalism and spam in a
> timely manner; in the current situation i'm happy that Clayton is still
> watching it a bit, and he certainly has the experience to do a good job.
> oh, and consider that currently the Wiki is still on Oracle/OOo
> infrastructure, not on Apache, so i guess if there really is a Committer
> requirement it does not currently apply.

That is a fair comment.  But since the wiki will shortly be on Apache
infrastructure, it is not irrelevant or a wasted effort to discuss
these issues now.

>> -Rob
> regards,
>  michael

View raw message