Moving forward: How we can unblock the situation together

:+1:

sure, at some point. (then how would they be comprehensovely linked to the wiki? maybe you could tag them ā€œhowtoā€?)
as previously said, I’m far from there yet. (is the ByLaws question adressed in there? is there a howto for the 2026 report?)

the ones I’m able to point so far are more directly user related.

If by shared you mean made public, that doesn’t make any sense as they vary per role, season and initiative. If you mean shared as in collective, I have to make it very clear that your priorities of fast response times and reviewing outdated content align with mine. I am doing a lot of janitorial work all the time and by now I must have fixed a couple of dozen issues pointed out by you. But not everyone shares those priorities and that’s OK. You and I have many ways to get other people involved in the ideas that we come up with, but mocking and humiliation is a very counterproductive way to choose.

I actually did something similar. :wink: See here: Topics tagged training

Whether to use the wiki, the forum or something different is a technical question. We seem to move more and more to Discourse, where we also publish all the minutes and all the decisions.

Which 2026 report do you refer to, the planned budget? This we discussed in the previous board call and we’ll collect budget proposals currently. @italovignoli sent an e-mail to various mailing list to that effect just these days.

We have many topics in our project, some are more user-facing, some are less user-facing. I guess this is also what explains Ilmari’s concern (which I share). We cannot be everywhere, immediately, at the same time. The project is too big, and there is too much cooking in parallel. This is in general a good sign, but TDF is mainly about enabling people to do things. Doing all ourselves, 24/7/365, is quite impossible.

The links I shared is just areas that concern mostly me, I am sure others have similar long lists for their area of the project, be it infra, release management and others. Don’t forget also the less technical roles, e.g. marketing, also here the todo list is possibly quite big.

We’ve been suffering in this project from bad treating of each other for quite a while, and ā€œlost in translationā€ and ā€œe-mails don’t have mimicsā€ add something too. We need to be careful how we treat one another. People are stretched thin, exhausted, stressed, and we need to come much more back to ā€œsafe watersā€.

Good advice. Many in the community think that invalidating the MC election results after the election, and after the period to contest it finished - was a totally disproportionate action that has also been shown to be arbitrary. I expect that this could create a serious legal issue for TDF if challenged - there were much simpler ways to resolve the stated concerns. Thankfully Cor is a reasonable person, a founder of the project, with a very long history of contributing positively to LibreOffice and appears not to have pursued this option.

Sadly my encouragement at the time to the board-selected MC which excludes Cor:

Seems to have been ignored - with some quite amazing non-renewals by the MC of long term contributors in good standing - apparently on the basis that they don’t like or agree with their political positions, and with no sight of due process.

As @fpy points out there is a lot of silence from the board, and more from the MC. There are still a good number of un-answered questions from the community around just this sad story, with sadly an ongoing lack of engagement on many other topics in the community that need resolution.

I would suggest that unblocking the situation is more than re-stating one’s own opinion or political position, but a genuine, deep listening, engagement with others - and the forging of wise and durable compromises by the board.

Hi Michael,

it would be great if you checked your statements before making them public as you keep trying to create narratives that have little to no connections with reality. That doesn’t help in unblocking the situation and move forward together.

If you expect that it means that once again you haven’t read the clear and extensive explanations and/or the evidence that your former contractor decided to make public.

It is then unclear to me why you started this post by re-stating opinions and political positions that do not take in consideration the well documented facts that are available also to you.

Of course and naturally starting from a common understanding of the facts.

ā€œCompromisesā€ are in my opinion the wrong approach when talking about legal entities that must act following laws and regulations of their respective jurisdictions.

Due to past experiences I would consider a wise approach to have clear and unambiguous written agreements vetted by the respective legal teams so that there would be less room for surprises down the line.