[LGM] Direct me to wrap up of previous LGMs, please

Thu Apr 25 14:48:17 PDT 2013

Hello.

To be honest, I think that yes, language used in the list should be
moderated, however, kicking people off doesn't show that we are trying to
change things.

Can you guys talk this in a different moment/place so we all can just keep
focusing on organizing a good event?

2013/4/25 Dave Neary <dneary at gnome.org>

> Hi,
>
> I agree.
>
> Dave.
> On 25 Apr 2013 19:52, "Louis Desjardins" <louis.desjardins at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> 2013/4/24 S.Kemter <sirko.kemter at gmail.com>
>>
>>> Hi,
>>
>>
>>> I think it's enough at this point now. Getting sick of your poison you
>>> are distributing the whole time here. There are 4 proposals, because
>>> Andreas forgot to mention Buenos Aires. That means 3 are on your side of
>>> the Atlantic. We all agreed in a meeting you was not seen in, that for the
>>> future we like to see proposals in a higher quality in advance.
>>> It was also agreed how to handle it this time, there is time until 15th
>>> of May for all for putting together a proposal answering to all questions.
>>> After that an IRC meeting will happen, where all open questions will be
>>> answered and an decision will be made. There was not fixed who has the
>>> right to vote in this meeting, it's an open process. There is also the
>>> option that no majority can go for one place and also there was an
>>> agreement to give more people the possibility to have there voice heard
>>> on the mailing list. It looks to me like an fair and acceptable way how to
>>> handle it, a huge step forward. Definitely better as the marshland we
>>> had here before.
>>>
>>> People who knows me well, know I have an memory like an elephant. So
>>> lets go back what did happen in Vienna. Two proposals for 2013 Madrid and
>>> Montreal. The majority was for Madrid and it was more an "could be" meaning
>>> for Montreal 2014. It was more lets Louis not travel sad home....
>>>
>>> From 8 LGM 3 was in Montreal, I think a lot agree that's more then
>>> enough. A lot will agree go there will destroy all opportunities we have
>>> now putting a clear process how and when propose it and make LGM to an
>>> really FLOSS event for all people interested in. Not for a few that like
>>> the marshland like it was because they have there sheep in the try....
>>>
>>> We will see what happen after 15th of May and where we go and how many
>>> of the proposals stay as option for 2015 in case they are not taken for
>>> 2014. But I fear after that unfortunate attempts here to enforce
>>> Montreal for 2014, nobody likes to go there also for 2015 even it has PyCon
>>> as an argument in that year to.
>>>
>>> What I wondering about is the arrogance that some have saying such
>>> things like differ from other floss events and is something totally
>>> special. It is not, some have to realize that. On all events the process is
>>> open and who does the work decides.
>>>
>>> This year on the table there was not only a lot of people, there was
>>> also a lot of people who are involved in other floss events some of them
>>> are bigger then the LGM such events like SCaLE, Flisol, FOSSASIA, LinuxTag,
>>> Linux-Tage, DevConf.cz
>>>
>>> speaking about participation where was your voice in the closing session
>>> or on the table? So please stay away now from your poisonous mails trying
>>> to enforce Montreal for 2014, it's not helpful we will find out soon where
>>> we go for 2014 and then open it for 2015.
>>>
>>> br gnokii
>>>
>>> P.S. dont feed the troll
>>
>>
>> To: Mr Sirko Kemter
>>
>> Dear Sir,
>>
>> I think your words are unacceptable. This verbal violence shocked me
>> completely.
>>
>> Such an attitude has nothing to do with the spirit of LGM.
>>
>> In over 8 years of the event I have never seen or heard such language as
>> the one you used in your aggressive apostrophe to one of the most valuable
>> member of the Scribus Team and of the LGM community.
>>
>> For those reasons I must ask you to:
>>
>> 1. Express publicly your apologies to Greg (because you insulted him
>> publicly) and to everyone who felt attacked or shocked by your intervention
>> — for using such a language towards him.
>>
>> 2. Withdraw from the discussions that will occur in this mailing list.
>>
>> Your attitude disqualifies you as a voice at LGM thus you cannot take
>> part anymore in the decision making process for the venue in 2014 or for
>> any kind of decision in the LGM, whatsoever.
>>
>> Louis Desjardins
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2013/4/24 Gregory Pittman <gpittman at iglou.com>
>>>
>>>> On 04/23/2013 05:58 PM, Tobias Ellinghaus wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Am Dienstag, 23. April 2013, 21:33:10 schrub Gregory Pittman:
>>>>>
>>>>> [...]
>>>>>
>>>>>  Well, for one thing, decisions are not based on the results of an
>>>>>> applause meter (as Femke mentioned at the time).
>>>>>>
>>>>> Since LGM is meant for the people actually going there an applause
>>>>> meter might
>>>>> very well be the best way to decide where to go. No idea if personal
>>>>> preferences of a few committee members are any better, we will see in
>>>>> about a
>>>>> year by looking at the number of participants.
>>>>>
>>>>> But that's just my personal opinion.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>  If you think about it though, there are some serious problems with
>>>> this method. At the foremost, it turns to decision into cheering for a
>>>> city/country, as opposed to seeing a proposed site in the context of the
>>>> quality of the LGM that might take place there, and perhaps some sense of
>>>> the economic and other challenges that attendees might face. The
>>>> presumption that those who did not attend LGM this year but have in the
>>>> past are no longer interested in LGM and unlikely to attend in future
>>>> doesn't really have anything to back it up. It seems possible that there
>>>> are some who cannot afford to attend every year, and proximity to where
>>>> they live is a major issue. If we imagine, for example, that next year LGM
>>>> might be in Leipzig, that would be 3 years in a row in Europe, rather
>>>> skewing the assessment of attendance.
>>>>
>>>> I don't think it's unusual for groups who have meetings to rely on some
>>>> committee for site selection. In the case of LGM, anyone who wishes to be
>>>> part of this process has been welcomed to volunteer to help. In the past,
>>>> few have come forward to volunteer their time and effort for the purpose.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Greg
>>>> ______________________________**_________________
>>>> Libre-graphics-meeting mailing list
>>>> Libre-graphics-meeting at lists.**freedesktop.org<Libre-graphics-meeting at lists.freedesktop.org>
>>>> http://lists.freedesktop.org/**mailman/listinfo/libre-**
>>>> graphics-meeting<http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libre-graphics-meeting>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> make me rich, buy my Inkscape book http://is.gd/yq5OD0 ;)
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Libre-graphics-meeting mailing list
>>> Libre-graphics-meeting at lists.freedesktop.org
>>> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libre-graphics-meeting
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Libre-graphics-meeting mailing list
>> Libre-graphics-meeting at lists.freedesktop.org
>> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libre-graphics-meeting
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Libre-graphics-meeting mailing list
> Libre-graphics-meeting at lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libre-graphics-meeting
>
>

-- 
tatica
Maria Gracia Leandro
Blog: http://tatica.org
Portfolio: http://tap.tatica.org
LinuxUser= 440285 GPG Public Key: E1CDCC56
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libre-graphics-meeting/attachments/20130425/c77b6eed/attachment.html>