Re: Process for deciding on branding strategy for our first release

[Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>]

On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 3:39 PM, Alexandro Colorado <jz...@openoffice.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 1:38 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 3:32 PM, Alexandro Colorado <jz...@openoffice.org>
>> wrote:
>> > On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 1:15 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Looking at the dev work that remains, I think we need to move forward
>> >> on this with deliberate speed.  This impacts both the branding on our
>> >> 3.4 release, as well as the branding on our web sites, both of which
>> >> are making strong progress.
>> >>
>> >> I think there are two main elements we need to decide on:
>> >>
>> >> 1) Product name:  Apache OpenOffice, Apache OpenOffice.org or something
>> >> else
>> >>
>> >> 2) Logo, for use on website, product splash screen etc.
>> >>
>> >> I propose that we discuss these topics on the ooo-marketing for two
>> >> weeks, until November 14th.  If there is consensus on these questions
>> >> then we will go forward to implement that consensus.  But if there is
>> >> no consensus by the 14th, then we will have a 72-hour vote of PPMC
>> >> members to decide among the alternatives.
>> >>
>> >> Of course, it is better to reach consensus on such questions, but a
>> >> product name is not optional, so we need to resolve these questions
>> >> one way or another.
>> >>
>> >> Any objections to this general approach and time frame?
>> >>
>> >> -Rob
>> >>
>> >
>> > My largest issue is basically the way is being handled this voting,
>> usually
>> > it seems that is not as easily traceable as a poll. Mailing list can
>> easily
>> > bury vote by just having chatty people or flamewars.
>> > I rather see the forum as a more dynamic way to reach consensus like they
>> > do with a voting poll separate from the overall discussion why is a good
>> > idea or not. Also I would miss the ability to change the voting in case
>> the
>> > voter realize that he has a change of heart. I do like the timeline.
>> > So I would propose a decision making framework to account vote, change
>> > votes, and easily browse/review overall group decisions.
>> >
>>
>> The way an Apache project typically does this is via separate
>> [DISCUSSION] and [VOTE] threads.  So it would be clear which is which.
>>  And in the [VOTE] thread we would only count the last vote a person
>> makes, so they can change their vote freely.
>>
>> But I would only have a [VOTE] if after 2 weeks there was still no
>> consensus.
>>
>> Would that work?
>>
>
> not really
>

Could you explain your concern again?  Or make a counter-proposal?

-Rob

>
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>> > --
>> > *Alexandro Colorado*
>> > *OpenOffice.org* Español
>> > http://es.openoffice.org
>> > fingerprint: E62B CF77 1BEA 0749 C0B8 50B9 3DE6 A84A 68D0 72E6
>> >
>>
>
>
>
> --
> *Alexandro Colorado*
> *OpenOffice.org* Español
> http://es.openoffice.org
> fingerprint: E62B CF77 1BEA 0749 C0B8 50B9 3DE6 A84A 68D0 72E6
>

Re: Process for deciding on branding strategy for our first release

[Alexandro Colorado <jz...@openoffice.org>]

On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 5:25 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:

> On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 3:39 PM, Alexandro Colorado <jz...@openoffice.org>
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 1:38 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 3:32 PM, Alexandro Colorado <jza@openoffice.org
> >
> >> wrote:
> >> > On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 1:15 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Looking at the dev work that remains, I think we need to move forward
> >> >> on this with deliberate speed.  This impacts both the branding on our
> >> >> 3.4 release, as well as the branding on our web sites, both of which
> >> >> are making strong progress.
> >> >>
> >> >> I think there are two main elements we need to decide on:
> >> >>
> >> >> 1) Product name:  Apache OpenOffice, Apache OpenOffice.org or
> something
> >> >> else
> >> >>
> >> >> 2) Logo, for use on website, product splash screen etc.
> >> >>
> >> >> I propose that we discuss these topics on the ooo-marketing for two
> >> >> weeks, until November 14th.  If there is consensus on these questions
> >> >> then we will go forward to implement that consensus.  But if there is
> >> >> no consensus by the 14th, then we will have a 72-hour vote of PPMC
> >> >> members to decide among the alternatives.
> >> >>
> >> >> Of course, it is better to reach consensus on such questions, but a
> >> >> product name is not optional, so we need to resolve these questions
> >> >> one way or another.
> >> >>
> >> >> Any objections to this general approach and time frame?
> >> >>
> >> >> -Rob
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > My largest issue is basically the way is being handled this voting,
> >> usually
> >> > it seems that is not as easily traceable as a poll. Mailing list can
> >> easily
> >> > bury vote by just having chatty people or flamewars.
> >> > I rather see the forum as a more dynamic way to reach consensus like
> they
> >> > do with a voting poll separate from the overall discussion why is a
> good
> >> > idea or not. Also I would miss the ability to change the voting in
> case
> >> the
> >> > voter realize that he has a change of heart. I do like the timeline.
> >> > So I would propose a decision making framework to account vote, change
> >> > votes, and easily browse/review overall group decisions.
> >> >
> >>
> >> The way an Apache project typically does this is via separate
> >> [DISCUSSION] and [VOTE] threads.  So it would be clear which is which.
> >>  And in the [VOTE] thread we would only count the last vote a person
> >> makes, so they can change their vote freely.
> >>
> >> But I would only have a [VOTE] if after 2 weeks there was still no
> >> consensus.
> >>
> >> Would that work?
> >>
> >
> > not really
> >
>
> Could you explain your concern again?  Or make a counter-proposal?
>

I believe I did already. Basically having a more automatized way of
accounting votes, review the discussions and come to a conclusion without
needing to weedout long discussions (maybe a voting on posts on relevance a
la slashdot).



>
> -Rob
>
> >
> >>
> >> -Rob
> >>
> >> > --
> >> > *Alexandro Colorado*
> >> > *OpenOffice.org* Español
> >> > http://es.openoffice.org
> >> > fingerprint: E62B CF77 1BEA 0749 C0B8 50B9 3DE6 A84A 68D0 72E6
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > *Alexandro Colorado*
> > *OpenOffice.org* Español
> > http://es.openoffice.org
> > fingerprint: E62B CF77 1BEA 0749 C0B8 50B9 3DE6 A84A 68D0 72E6
> >
>



-- 
*Alexandro Colorado*
*OpenOffice.org* Español
http://es.openoffice.org
fingerprint: E62B CF77 1BEA 0749 C0B8 50B9 3DE6 A84A 68D0 72E6