Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2012 Archives by date, by thread · List index

Hi Christian, *,

Am Samstag, 4. Februar 2012, 15:28:07 schrieb Christian Lohmaier:
Hi Andreas, *,

On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 4:54 PM, Andreas Mantke <> wrote:


We had a public discussion and decision of the BoD already. If there are
no unknown facts or new arguments, we should not discuss and decide
again (and again).

I admit that I didn't follow the meeting, did not read the minutes,
but what Jesús did propose would make a nice compromise, wouldn't it
(not suggesting that it should be used for this year's voting, but to
consider for the next round)

We can discuss that for the next round; maybe there are better solutions / proposals.

My question is only, why we open up the discussion now (and not after the voting). 
The BoD had discussed the topic and decided about it in public. Everyone had the 
oportunity to bring up his arguments before the decision.

Point 2 would be a nice job ;-(
Maybe we will also hear some complaints, if someone missed to send a mail
in time.

I absolutely don't get your point. You are saying that writing a mail
is too much work, and that not writing a mail to be invited is a

Reaily, you didn't got it.
I meant the job for the receiver of the mails (Florian?). I won't volunteer for the 
job to read all of this mails, decide to give the voting rights and put the mail-
writer into a list or the environment for voting. That's a really nice job and the 
proposal should also contain the proposal for volunteering for the job ;-)

Those non-TDF-members are not allowed to vote now, so how is opening a
door for them too much of a problem?

But maybe I completely misunderstood and you're talking about the
opposite side, the group of people that are needed to process those
manual requests (i.e. create a voting token and send out the
corresponding link)

I think we should invite every contributor to apply for a membership
status and then he / she could vote for the venue of the conferences
2013 and later. It would be good to increase our member base.

But a rather bad reason. If you register just to be able to vote, then
your commitment to the project is questionable, and thus the entire
membership status is questioned. (remember that becoming a member
requires past contributions (in whatever form) and the moral
commitment to continue contributing in a similar fashion). "I want to
vote for the location of the next conference" is not enough in my

Right. But if you want to vote only for the location of the next LibreOffice 
conference, where you will not attend, because your commitment is not longer than the 
day you write your mail or maybe the end of the voting, why should you get any voting 

(But don't get me wrong, sending messages to known contributors who
did not yet apply for membership is of course fine, but not if the
reason behind is "otherwise you won't be able to vote for the

It should be a conference, organized from the LibreOffice community for the community 
and we set rules that support this goal. But we should discuss the topic after this 
voting and in front of the next voting. We had to start the current voting very soon, 
thus the organizers for 2012 have enough time to prepare the conference.

## Developer LibreOffice
## Freie Office-Suite für Linux, Mac, Windows
## Support the Document Foundation (
## Meine Seite: 

Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to
Posting guidelines + more:
List archive:
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted


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.