Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2011 Archives by date, by thread · List index


+1




Thank You

Best Regards
Varun Mittal <http://www.varunmittal.info>

Google <https://www.google.com/profiles/varunmittal87>
Facebook<http://www.facebook.com/mittal.varun>
   LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/in/varunmittal87>
Twitter<http://twitter.com/varunmittal19>

"Uncertainty is the only Certainty of LIFE"



On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 3:37 PM, Narayan Aras <narayanaras@hotmail.com>wrote:


Hi Mike, David, all-

The agenda has 10 topics. Too many for a 1 hour session.
(http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Website/ConfCall/Agenda).

We will have only 5 minutes to settle each topic.

The discussions will not be conclusive in this pressure cooker situation.
Then we will come to the "storm" (or "fission") stage even before we
realize! :)

Having a series of calls is not feasible, as that approach needs a lot of
time.
Besides, we are finding it difficult to set up this FIRST call itself.
So setting up so many calls till we trash out all issues is virtually
impossible.

Therefore, it is best to settle at least the fundamental differences
offline.
That leaves the main meeting to settle finer details, and to ratify what
was agreed offline.

Assuming that we agree to use an offline tool to argue our case, the next
question is "which tool"?

Well, the simplest tool (which is also readily available) is a wiki
discussion page.

However, it cannot handle counterarguments that have to be attached to a
specific part of someone else's statement. Also, when in a multi-person
argument, it would quickly become confusing who is opposing whose views
fully/party/conditionally.

In other words, it cannot create an argument map properly. (Which is the
need of the hour).

A concept map does that extremely well.

Another advantage of a Concept map is that it also allows us to split a
larger issue, and discuss the parts separately and then combine the
conclusions again.

Concept map also allows us to interrelate different streams of arguments as
the plot gets larger with more and more arguments added. Note that no other
tool is good at this.

Therefore I suggest using a concept map tool like CMAP, Freemind,
graphmind. or even brainstorm.

Someone will need to set up this tool temporarily.

What do you think?

If you have any doubt, we could try out one (contentious) topic on a wiki
discussion page.


Regards,
Narayan


Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 08:11:33 +0930
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-design] Re: [libreoffice-website] Re: new
features  page ...
From: michael@wheatland.com.au
To: website@libreoffice.org

On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 3:41 AM, Charles Marcus
<CMarcus@media-brokers.com> wrote:
On 2011-01-17 8:39 AM, David Nelson wrote:
But I see a chance to bring him back into the mainstream of the
project by encouraging him (and his "Drupal boys") to take a leading
role in the development of the SilverStripe website as a superb
communications and marketing tool for Libreoffice and TDF.

I also think that, if Michael were so inclined, Drupal could initially
serve as the 'support' backend, with its potential for integrating all
of the different support modes (email lists, forums and newsgroups)...
this would give it the opportunity to 'prove' itself (personally, I
have
no idea if Drupal can even truly achieve this, much less is preferable
over Silverstripe)...

I can still be there to play an assistive role in the wings, with
some great ideas, too. But Michael could take on the main written
content development role, working in close symbiosis with Christoph
and Ivan. I feel they will have a close empathy and an excellent
working relationship.

I feel that this is a novel and creative solution to what could
otherwise become a conflictual and unproductive situation. We will
all win. Most important of all, LIBREOFFICE and TDF will win.

What do you think? I am including Michael in this mail, and I want
to hear his feelings on this.

I think its a great idea if Michael is willing to take it on...

Best regards,

Charles

Charles,
I like the idea, but I think it is worth waiting for the conference
call to discuss.
This is achievable, however it will take some time setting up and
configuring, and in the same time we could have all the same
functionality as the existing site on one unified system, allowing us
to automatically manage all of the cross links between the systems. We
might end up creating a monster that we need to manually manage. I
will look into the possibilities prior to the meeting.

Again, it is a great idea. I will add it to the agenda for the Conference
Call.

Thanks,
Mike Wheatland

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to website+help@libreoffice.org<website%2Bhelp@libreoffice.org>
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/website/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to website+help@libreoffice.org<website%2Bhelp@libreoffice.org>
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/website/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***



-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to website+help@libreoffice.org
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/website/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Context


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.