[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[board-discuss] Plone site & grief


Hello all,


Am 05.11.18 um 23:50 schrieb Thorsten Behrens:
> Hi Andi,
>
> first off, I'm very sorry these things seem to have taken a turn for
> the worse.
>

that's most often the outcome of a 'special' way of communication.

> I'm trying to move this part of the discussion now off the design
> list, and onto board-discuss, as it seems to primarily deal with
> interaction style, within & from the board. So Fup2 board-discuss
> please.
>

As I'm not member of the board since Februar this year anymore, I'm not
aware of the communication within the board.

> Beyond some details below, where I'd love to get to is getting over
> personal gripes eventually (on all sides - happy to call you any time,
> to hear what you'd expect here!); perhaps with a way to keep you
> engaged with the community you've helped building, but at least with a
> way for the project to keep the Plone sites running properly for the
> while.
>

I expect only the way of communication and behavior that I already
described in my previous email.

> Andreas Mantke wrote:
>> There were no real internal discussions with the board about issues.
>>
> Not to put too fine a point on it - but we discussed the issues around
> the queue of pending submissions e.g. in January & February this year,
> on the infra/hostmaster list.
>
> Also in 2016, a discussion not too different from the one here took
> place inside the board, when looking for options to go beyond the
> first version of the template & extension site.
>
>> But afterwards I was kicked out by this thread. I'm not used to be
>> pilloried for my work during my spare time. And maybe others too.
>>
> Please don't take this as pillorying you. If it came across like that
> - apologies. In fact, without the original Plone sites, LibreOffice
> wouldn't have had a templates & extension repo for a long time, and no
> one disputes the relevance of that.
>

It's not important how you think I should not feel, but it's only
important how I feel because of the way of communication from member(s)
of the board.

The member communicated in public about the work I had done for about
seven years, without take in account to discuss the situation or
requests with me first (and get some additional information).
This make it explicit for me, that I shouldn't be part of the discussion
and it descredits my previous work publicly (thus pilloring).

I see this as a line of communication infringements. Because of a
mistake that I did with the administration of the Content Management
System in 2012 I was pointed regularly onto this mistake for about three
or four years. I felt impeached to communicate destructively some month
ago, although I spent a lot of my spare time over the years to attend
events on behalf of TDF/LibreOffice to spread the word about the project and its pros.

After some rethinking I had the impression it helped, if I narrowed my engagement to
the administration of the extensions and templates website. But then I
got this thread on the design list.

Thus I was disenchanted, that my work inside the project had a real
value especially for the board.

There were no real excuse for this communication style later. The
response to my email three weeks after the thread included second part
(the 'but message'), which were the real message (no real apologize,
but another threat).

Regards,
Andreas

--
Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Mobiltelefon mit K-9 Mail gesendet.
Follow-Ups:
Re: [board-discuss] Plone site & griefThorsten Behrens <thb@documentfoundation.org>
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.