I believe is much better to have open discussions than trying to keep hiding the fact that there are issues that some seem less inclined to see solved.
If long-established contributors want to keep doing something that is sub-optimal then I believe that others should speak out so that things get looked at. If a [VOTE] thread doesn’t receive positive comments maybe that vote should be stopped, things should be fixed and people should not be censored by a Board Chair that should be impartial and intervene to fix things and not to tell people to shut up.
It is about time that this list becomes a case study for those that want to see how good things can come out from a list that wanted to be “politically correct” to a list where people are free to express, sometimes even in a quite strong way, there views about TDF and the community to make things better for all.
On 11/04/2022 14:27, Simon Phipps wrote:
I’m writing to ask you to implement some form of moderation on this mailing list.
In the last week or so, we have seen participants abusing a [VOTE] thread and then a director further abusing it to chide the Board Chair for attempting to stop the abuse. We have seen over-frequent posting. We have seen content-free hostility expressed to long-established contributors. We’ve seen posts making no attempt to find positive content earlier in the conversation to amplify. While there have been one or two positive examples, this list has become a case study in a hostile online environment.
Specifically I would ask the Board chair and vice-chair to act to remedy this situation so that this list becomes a safe place to contribute, and one where it is safe to make imperfect contributions that can be collaboratively evolved open-source-style towards better contributions.
Simon Phipps, Trustee, The Document Foundation