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

Op 5-9-2020 om 18:07 schreef Dennis Roczek:
I talked to many different contributors and mostly they simply do not
know that there is something like a membership and also do not have any
interest in another mail address and ask what are their gains in getting
into the club.

Still not really a clue what they advantages are.
* e-mail
* Able to vote and get voted for.
- However currently not interested being active in MC
- Voting on people I don't really know. So can't really asses their quality
They formal task of MC not that spectacular and the informal tasks don't go about strategic decision either So voting for MC which doesn't have big role (not saying irrelevant). Except MC members maybe move up to BoD

I wouldn't really mind if they sitting MC would recruit the new MC members themselves (co-option)
Maybe they know even better who are capable or not.

I don't get the feeling to having more influence by being a member or not.
They membership is more a TDF organizational/governmental requirement (so needed for TDF perspective) instead for they members being member. TDF needs they members to have a group who can vote and be voted for. To prevent outsiders to get control over TDF (MC/BoD) They only advantage for the members themselves is maybe a role at TDF. Or to show affiliation / association with TDF.

Might have hoped for some more strategical information (in a role of a members) . Some 'inside' information. Some exclusivity. There is not even a roadmap for what to expect for next release. Say what project planning is; I mostly assume devs working towards something. So some kind of planning. If it's simplification of code or new feature. Not that I want to pin people on deadlines or whatever. But to get some impression what's playing. It's still a kind of black box.. Release plan filled after being finished.  Their is for example the jumbo sheet project; it's still at experimental (for good reason).  However no clue what the targeted time frame is; Especially after it got announced in Release notes for 7.0. To silence they angry mob for now. Not that it's actually stable or usable. But no clue about what the idea currently is.

They "Marketing in Vendor Neutral FLOSS Projects" could have been discussed internally with members (before being posted online). Or they whole discussion on marketing strategy (Personal Edition). If there is a place where they discussion should be, it's at member level. I still prefer some secrecy. Not everything should be argued en public.. transparency is nice but not everything. Exclusivity is also a thing.

Still love a non-public forum like of thing for members only. [Please not as mailing list]. And would make it possible to communicate/ share thoughts a bit more freely/openly. They board could post some (provocative) question/ insight. And members given the ability to react. Even a member could start a discussion.

It's the BoD who has the ultimate say. Consulting they MC. Both must make up their minds based upon the members input (and maybe weighting some other concerns like profit of eco-system partners) They MC needs to be their to be consulted and to give advice to they BoD. With ultimately they impeachment card.

So Marketing plan shouldn't be posted on public mailing list, before they members are consulted. Only the 'accorded' version should go public (fiat from BoD/MC) after members got consulted. They public response could still make it necessary to adjust. But there was an internal discussion in advance. Instead of they Personal Edition mess. They members could also get some more details/regular updates on they research for say commercial route.

This would give membership some actual advantage, I think.


To unsubscribe e-mail to:
Posting guidelines + more:
List archive:
Privacy Policy:


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.