Hi all, I haven't written much, on purpose, in this very hot thread for various reasons: first of all I was really uncomfortable with the non-regular contributors standing up and try to force a decision that it's supposed to have to be a *team* decision (as our beloved do-ocracy should work). In addition, my point of view is totally the same as David's, so I saw no point in copy-pasting his mails :). But the main reason is that, even if I think that public discussions on such delicate topics are really important, I was disturbed by the amount of energies spent on this topic while the last issue of DPN is waiting to be completed and released since almost two months. And I saw no one of the oh-so-active-in-this-topic people work on that. It's too easy, IMO, to claim to be part of the team only when there's a decision to be taken, writing zillion of mails, and not when there is actually *work* to be done on DPN. Only David has worked on it during this time. IMO facts speak better than words. On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 10:06:52PM -0400, David Prévot wrote: > > I was partly referring to Raphaël's behavior on this thread. Sending > numerous messages on this list about this topic sounds highly > inappropriate: presenting himself as “a regular contributor of the > publicity team” while being obviously in conflict of interest, and > “wonder[ing] what's the proper way to escalate this” really looks like > the do-ocracy can be respected on one side (press team decision), but > needs to be bypassed on the other (for the exact same topic). > +1 > Deciding directly between the actors, and not in a public place like > this one may also have been an advantage to find a quicker consensus. Of > course, if concerned people all go in the same direction, there is not > much to argue anyway. > > Having the discussion in a public place is a good thing, since it allows > people to share their point of view, and to give advice, but seems to > make it a bit more difficult to take a final decision when external > people wants to lobby for a specific decision. The blurry line of the > publicity team (who is a member, who is not) doesn't seems to help here. > When Stefano “encourage[s] the people regularly doing DPN to decide”, > that's more in line with the do-ocracy. I'm not advocating private > discussion, but it could have been less “annoying/demotivating” if > non-regular editors of the DPN had been less active on this thread. I, too, find really demotivating that non-regular editors can drive a decision of such importance. It makes you feel like your active and enthusiastic work during this last year - writing DPN every two-weeks or so- isn't so valuable. Cheers, Francesca -- "People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint is more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly, timey wimey... stuff." The Doctor
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature