openoffice-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rob Weir <>
Subject Re: Tolerance and acceptance
Date Wed, 06 Jun 2012 12:06:48 GMT
On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 7:24 AM, Ross Gardler <> wrote:
> I move that there is no need to continue to fuel the fires of AOO vs
> LO. The PPMC is now effective at ignoring anti-AOO materials on our
> own lists. I suggest the PPMC should further silence inflammatory
> posts that are anti-LO on our lists.

And what about negative posts about AOO?  Shoul we "silence" those?  I
hope not.  Negative posts from users (within some bounds of decorum)
is valuable feedback to the project.  I think we should value frank
discourse about the product and where it falls short.

I don't think we expect users to be familiar with The Apache Way or
even mailing lists in general.  We see all sorts of disorderly conduct
on ooo-users, from SCREAMING ALL CAPS, to flames, etc.  Project
members, on the other hand, should lead by example, and focus on
constructive comments.

So although I agree with your sentiment here, I think we need to be
very careful when considering "silencing inflammatory posts" in
general, since a ham fisted approach would also silence criticism of
AOO, which is valuable to receive.


> For example, a recent post on ooo-users said:
> "The LO guys should have thought about that before forking OpenOffice
> following Novell's siren's call. (remember the first major fork of
> OpenOffice was Novell's Go-OO which incorporated the MS OOXML
> support).
> In fact, it was their actions that killed the commercial prospects of
> StarOffice, which Oracle had renamed "Oracle Open Office" (without the
> .org)."
> I suggest that the ooo-users list is not the place for these kinds of
> opinions, regardless of their validity. This is especially true when
> they are made in response to a positive comment, which was "The main
> goal has always been to create the best Office suite possible - so
> let's unite around that."
> Our communities need to be welcoming. There is no chance of creating
> unity if disunity is the response. I'm not suggesting this be tackled
> onlist, that can be counter-productive too. I'm merely highlighting it
> and encouraging individuals on the PPMC who agree with me to consider
> sending a polite but firm request to stay focused on helping users on
> the ooo-users list.
> Ross

View raw message