Encouraging discussion with the community

When I was elected to the board of the Document Foundation, as the only self nominated candidate, I promised myself to promote discussions between the members of the board and the members of the community - that is, those who voted for us - with the aim of breaking the isolation of the board and promoting an exchange of views on the strategies and future of LibreOffice.

In order to do this, I had identified a few general topics that would allow me to take the pulse of the community in order to understand, both directly and indirectly, how the governance of the project should be addressed, even in all the cases where it is not possible to make the issue explicit for legal reasons.

Unfortunately, I was not able to do what I would have liked because of three problems that severely limited my time availability:

  1. FAMILY: I have a 37-year-old son with addiction problems to alcohol and in the past also to cocaine, which is very difficult to deal with even when normal. Imagine sitting on a time bomb, not knowing when it will go off.

  2. HEALTH: In February I had several episodes of high blood pressure with a general feeling of malaise. As a precaution, my GP advised me to keep travel to a minimum and had me undergo a series of tests which revealed that, due to a combination of hereditary factors, stress and mild hypertension, I have a dilated aorta which needs to be kept under strict control. I can travel, but I must avoid exertion and stress.

  3. WORK: As you can understand, family and health problems have reduced my availability, even if only temporarily, so that I have had to make choices to ensure my presence in the TDF team, and in one case (layout of the annual report) I arrived later than the deadline I had set myself.

In addition, in the little free time I had, I had to read - and in some cases reread - all the documents that we had inherited from the previous Board, both to understand the situation and to decide what to do to resolve the complex and often interrelated problems that limit the operation of The Document Foundation.organisation.

The result of this activity was the presentation of twelve different motions to be discussed at the next Board meetings. In my opinion, the approval of these motions could solve or significantly reduce some of the problems, and in any case would demonstrate to the authorities a proactive attitude towards solving the problems on the part of the current Board.

This week I am on holiday and have decided to take over the project and write introductions to the discussion topics, as I believe that more interaction - public and transparent - between Board members and community members is needed anyway.

Some of the discussion topics I will present over the next few days are related to the history of our project, also for the benefit of younger members who are not fully familiar with the genesis and development in the early years, and thus to medium and long term decisions, while others are more related to the current situation - of technology and the market - and thus to short and medium term decisions.

Looking forward to your comments. Thanks, Italo
(mine are entirely personal opinions, but the objective of encouraging discussion with the community is part of my duties as a member of the Board of Directors)

DISCLAIMER: As my simultaneous presence on the Board of Directors and on the team of The Document Foundation where I deal with marketing and PR, activities for which I am paid, could give rise to criticism and a potential conflict of interest, I think it is useful to clarify that I have asked for my remuneration for marketing and PR activities - set by previous Board of Directors - to be frozen until I will not be a member of the Board of Directors (i.e. until TDF Members will elect me to the Board of Directors).

I would like to clarify a passage in the previous message that could be misunderstood: when I state that I am the only totally independent member, I am referring to the fact that mine was the only self-candidate, whereas in all other cases the candidature was proposed by a single member for a group of people. Of these candidatures, there are independent ones, expressing their own positions unrelated to any relationship with companies or groups.

On the other hand, looking at what is happening for the election of the Membership Committee, I find that the creation of groups or cordatas around policy documents is a malpractice that needs to be stopped.

The Document Foundation already has a policy document, which is our statutes. If this is no longer up to date, a proposal for improvement is legitimate, but not that of an alternative document.

(mine are entirely personal opinions)

First, thank you, Italo, for taking the time to write this. Even though this is an introductory post rather than one of the concrete proposals you are putting forward. I’m sure I speak on behalf on all who know you in the user/trustee community in wishing your son success in stabilizing his life and yourself in helping him; and the best of health to you.

Are we talking about the problems vis-a-vis the authorities, as stated in the audit? Or problems the TDF faces in general?

Anyway, awaiting your posts regarding the different proposals.

Perhaps that situation merits its own discussion at some point. That’s a rather strong statement (which echoes something I’ve just said about the MC elections).

MOTIONS: there is a mix of topics, some are related to the problems mentioned in the audit (and at the moment I cannot share more details about these motions), some are specific proposals like limiting to two consecutive terms the presence in the BoD and the MC or funding a book to help developers external to the project to reduce the steep learning curve to LibreOffice development to make it easier for them to start developing and participate to tenders, some are just methodological.

GROUPS: I agree about the strength of the statement, but I think that we already have a document which should inspire our activity when we are elected to the BoD or the MC, which is the statutes, and our first objective should be to make the statutes a reality, and improve them if necessary, without the need of creating different documents which mix topics which are already in the statutes (respect for the community, or inclusiveness) and others which are objectives (organize the LibreOffice Conference outside Europe, or increase the number of TDF Members).