Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice

Simon Phipps <simon@webmink.com> wrote on 06/08/2011 08:56:17 PM:

> From: Simon Phipps <simon@webmink.com>
> To: discuss@documentfoundation.org
> Date: 06/08/2011 09:00 PM
> Subject: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join 
ApacheOpenOffice
> On 9 Jun 2011, at 01:47, donald_harbison@us.ibm.com wrote:
>
> > Don Harbison
> > Program Director, IBM ODF Initiative
> > Tel. +1-978-399-7018
> > Mobile: +1-978-761-0116
> > Email: donald_harbison@us.ibm.com
> >
> > Simon Phipps <simon@webmink.com> wrote on 06/08/2011 07:55:02 PM:
> >
> > > From: Simon Phipps <simon@webmink.com>
> > > To: discuss@documentfoundation.org
> > > Date: 06/08/2011 07:55 PM
> > > Subject: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join 
> > ApacheOpenOffice
> > > On 9 Jun 2011, at 00:43, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Jun 8, 2011, at 6:32 PM, Simon Phipps wrote:
> > > > > > Certainly being an independent, legally established foundation is
> > > > > > critical, isn't it, as compare to one which is "just" a legally
> > > > > > established one? Not saying that TDF isn't at all, but the
> > > > > > 'independent' part is important.
> > > > >
> > > > > Not really hugely important, as long as everything is open to 
> > > scrutiny and beyond the control of any interested party - 
> > > transparency is the key, just like it is at Apache. Any organisation
> > > can be gamed - it's a function of having rules, since "every system 
> > > of rules contains within it the game that plays it and ultimately 
> > > subverts it"[1]. But it will indeed be good when TDF is able to 
> > > complete the bootstrap process so the innuendo can stop.
> > > > Agreed... the only reason I mention "independent" is that even
> > > > a clearly independent foundation such as the ASF has been alluded
> > > > to be in cahoots with IBM/Oracle regarding all this, so I'm sure
> > > > that TDF will get the same amount of scrutiny and baseless
> > > > claims, and being able to point to their independence will nip
> > > > that in the bud.
> > >
> > > I'm always amused when Apache is accused of collaborating with any 
> > > corporate entity - it's obviously almost impossible for that happen.
> > > The problem is not collaboration; it's gameability, and all rule-
> > > based and transparent entities eventually suffer from it once they 
> > > are fully understood by those most likely to benefit from doing so. 
> >
> > Is there something useful to be said here? If so, what is it? 
> > Non-sequitur?
>
> I'm not sure what you mean by that, honestly (and welcome to the 
> list by the way, perhaps you should introduce yourself). 
>
> But you really need to get that mailer of yours sorted out, it keeps
> top-posting a huge signature block each time you reply.

Yes, I am now properly chastised. Well, so be it. Blame it on my 
newbie-ness. 
With respect to my introduction, I think you must have been off making 
very 
professional photographs and did not notice my post[1]

I'm also a passionate photographer, and welcome an opportunity to share 
with you.
Peace.

/don

> S.
>
>
> -- 
> Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+help@documentfoundation.org
> Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
> List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
> All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be 
deleted
>
[1] 
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/201106.mbox/browser 

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+help@documentfoundation.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted