Re: [Fwd: Re: New supporter]

[Claus Schwarm <c schwarm gmx net>]

On Tue, 5 Jul 2005 23:38:31 -0400
Luis Villa <luis villa gmail com> wrote:

> On 7/5/05, Claus Schwarm <c schwarm gmx net> wrote:
> > So, althought our own efforts have no direct result for us, did I
> > understand you correcty: You dare to say we're not really peers?
> > Don't you think, this is a little bit demotivating?
> 
> It might be demotivating for some folks, I guess, but I don't think it
> should be. Supporting and serving and fulfilling the needs of a group
> who you feel is doing honorable, valuable work (instead of
> managing/directing/'leading' them) is in and of itself honorable,
> valuable, important work.
> 

I'm not quite sure whom do you mean by the last 'them'. IMHO, the idea
of any particular group 'leading' (directing, managing) an other
particular group is a bad idea for a volunteer project.

Sharing the same goal(s) should be sufficient for getting things decided
and done. 

Unfortunatly, the goals of the GNOME project are not publicitly shared.
I'm not even sure, if there's really an agreement on the goals apart
from the (L)GPL/HIG combination.

Your above text is a nice example of the disadvantages of lacking
explicit goals: You try to apeal to (my) feelings! Lets' take the role
of the devil's advocate for a moment: What's honorable or valuable of
the work of the GNOME project contributors? Can you express that?

You may also consider the public relations point of view: Suggestions to
act as if we wouldn't be peers just add another brick in the 'GNOME devs
are arrogant'-wall; especially if ever made more public by blog posts
on the planet, for example.

Also, a number of readers are probably non-native english speakers. That
makes some formulations open to misunderstandings.

To make a long text short: We need a better answer to the 'Who's
responsible for product decisions?' question.

Cheers, 
Claus