Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2020 Archives by date, by thread · List index

On 26/06/2020 18:50, Michael Meeks wrote:
Interestingly the slides were also posted here a week ago, and 
discussed in a public board meeting last week too (IIRC). [...]

That's great; I must have missed it, though I am subscribed. First 
five rounds of drafting with the board, the final check with the 
marketing team, is that how it went? ;)

Clearly, we're soliciting feedback and eager to get input from the 
whole community.

See my comments to Daniel on opportunities for hearing vs acting 
I do not take it for granted that this information was shared with
 the team prior to adoption (though to gain support from the team 
it seems like a sensible move).

[...] =) this has been quite widely shared; but we can always do more
to communicate better; clearly.

Sorry I was unclear -- I meant that it's fine if strategic / policy
drafts aren't always shared, in my view. I see little point in sharing
something so contentious that the community can't change it, and I
recognise the difficulty in handling such topics even internally. 
Sometimes private drafting is necessary, as I think most NGO board
members in other sectors would agree.

The strain on this coordination is plainly visible in the plan 
itself, on the "preface" slides explaining eg the LibreOffice 
Online situation. It's a problem when a staff member is forced to 
hint that some topics are out of bounds in this way because they 
are stuck between "a rock and hard place" and must resort to such 
things to discourage input on controversial issues which can have 
no effect.

Hmm? I don't know that anyone is forced to hint anything. And your 
input is welcome of course on all related topics.

Slide 41 contains several hints in my view. No concrete risks, such
as a fork, are stated. CIB and Collabora are not named anywhere in
the document. 

The problem space here is a large & really complex one where 
Marketing plays a vital role - many people coming fresh to the 
problem-space badly need a primer to help understand the
interlocking opportunities & pitfalls, so it seems sensible to have a
detailed proposal to kick around; of course improving it, or
presenting another proposal is perfectly possible.

Instead of trying to do everything in one document, why not break
it into strategy statements on the separate issues addressed, then
pass those to the marketers as policy directions from the board,
so that they can be pursued in purely marketing terms? That's
the beginning of an idea at least; I'm sure we could improve on it

The current draft plan is broad in scope, covering community 
management, branding, and touching on ecosystem design. Tough 
topics could be split into other sections, or strategy documents
if necessary, freeing the marketing team with more room to
influence the narrower, purely marketing topics which remain.

We can come up with a better process of course; but I'm more 
interested in your (and other) concrete suggestions / or new 
proposals to make things better - so things can be improved.

Concrete suggestions but again, it seems obvious to me that 
there are ares of the strategy draft which are not open to influence 
from volunteers, which in itself is no problem, but makes a 
request for input, in parts, meaningless.

I shared some ideas on the marketing list in response to the first
draft. I would have shared several more if they had a hope of 
having a positive effect. But they don't, so they would merely
constitute more hot air.

You had some good ideas around KPIs AFAIR, which I imagine will turn 
up in the next iteration; but I'm personally eager for more.

Thank you for your encouragement!


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.