Menu
▾
▴
envolution-devel
|
From: Denver P. Jr. <den...@co...> - 2003-07-05 19:22:17
|
This all goes back to when I talked with brian about a structure in place to handle every aspect of a community. Remember that Scott? But you tool control of everything and left little for anyone else to do. -----Original Message----- From: env...@li... [mailto:env...@li...] On Behalf Of Scott Kindley Sent: Saturday, July 05, 2003 12:40 PM To: Evolution-Dev-List Subject: Re: [Envolution-devel] URGENT: What's going on with envo.de? On Sat, 2003-07-05 at 08:20, Christoph Schwaeppe wrote: > Hi Max; > > they are able to develop own themes. Have a look at > http://cms-themes.de/. The first article there you will understand > > You are right, some of them want, want and some are very fireheads. > > But I'm alone since two weeks, we didn't change envo.de to 1.2.5 until > today and there are questions I can't answer by myself. > > One question is: Are the fontsize settings in encompass still working? > How about having each support site volunteer one member to join and keep active on this email list. Then perhaps prior to public releases support sites can have all the information needed about upcmoing releases prior to it hitting the street. In other words our support sites should be activly involoved in Envo development instead of sitting back and waiting for things to be spoon fed to them. Just as Envo as a whole activly engages our end user community so too should we as developers engage each other! But not after there is a problem.....instead before a problem exists. Just my two cents worth! Zoom ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email sponsored by: Free pre-built ASP.NET sites including Data Reports, E-commerce, Portals, and Forums are available now. Download today and enter to win an XBOX or Visual Studio .NET. http://aspnet.click-url.com/go/psa00100006ave/direct;at.asp_061203_01/01 _______________________________________________ Envolution-devel mailing list Env...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/envolution-devel |
|
From: Scott K. <sc...@ki...> - 2003-07-06 02:08:15
|
On Sat, 2003-07-05 at 14:21, Denver Prophit Jr. wrote: > This all goes back to when I talked with brian about a structure in > place to handle every aspect of a community. Remember that Scott? But > you tool control of everything and left little for anyone else to do. > And as Brian agreed we shouldn't and couldn't "handle a community" as you put it! It's too bad you didn't continue to show up for the rest of the meetings we had or else maybe you would have known that. The community doesn't need the likes of you, or me, or anyone else to dictate to them what should or shouldn't be done. It's basically run by consensus. So either accept it or don't I don't care. If you want a business to run, go establish one...cause this is not a business. It's an open source project. This isn't a place where one person or set of people govern others. Instead it is a community of volunteers who each choose when, where, and if they want to participate. It is unfortunate that some consider volunteer projects to be businesses where attendance is mandatory and expected. Instead Brian, Max, Brandon, and I prefer that people who wish to participate do so in an environment which is receptive. That is precisely what I mean by being proactive...but it also means that we can't badger people to participate. As for taking control...I did no such thing. I was the one who drafted and published the articles about turning over envolution management to the community...no one including you stepped up to the plate to do so. So don't give me that crap that I took over and left everyone else out. All I did Denver was suggest that official support sites pick a single person to monitor and particpate on this email list to keep abreast of development changes and issues. Thats all! Sounds to me like your trying to start a flame war or something. Zoom |
|
From: Denver P. Jr. <den...@co...> - 2003-07-06 18:06:50
|
I stopped showing up because you were running everything. Wrong the idea of a organization structure was NOT to dictate to the community but to be in a better position to handle the community and its direction, ideas and inputs. I suggested the 501-3C to Brian for funding non-profit projects like promotion, paid programmers and the like. I NEVER suggested a company for profit. But here we are again back to calling for organization when this could have been done a year ago. Why would I say you took almost total control and usurped everyone else's job? Because myself and others who confided in me told me so. After it was decided not to go the route of a organization structure but stick to your idea of a programmers structure I was asked to promote and market by Brian. Yet, everyday no tasks were assign to me and you went ahead in your capacity as lead programmer and take over marketing and promotion and everything else under the sun. I certainly hope that does not occur again. -----Original Message----- From: env...@li... [mailto:env...@li...] On Behalf Of Scott Kindley Sent: Saturday, July 05, 2003 9:07 PM To: Evolution-Dev-List Subject: RE: [Envolution-devel] URGENT: What's going on with envo.de? On Sat, 2003-07-05 at 14:21, Denver Prophit Jr. wrote: > This all goes back to when I talked with brian about a structure in > place to handle every aspect of a community. Remember that Scott? But > you tool control of everything and left little for anyone else to do. > And as Brian agreed we shouldn't and couldn't "handle a community" as you put it! It's too bad you didn't continue to show up for the rest of the meetings we had or else maybe you would have known that. The community doesn't need the likes of you, or me, or anyone else to dictate to them what should or shouldn't be done. It's basically run by consensus. So either accept it or don't I don't care. If you want a business to run, go establish one...cause this is not a business. It's an open source project. This isn't a place where one person or set of people govern others. Instead it is a community of volunteers who each choose when, where, and if they want to participate. It is unfortunate that some consider volunteer projects to be businesses where attendance is mandatory and expected. Instead Brian, Max, Brandon, and I prefer that people who wish to participate do so in an environment which is receptive. That is precisely what I mean by being proactive...but it also means that we can't badger people to participate. As for taking control...I did no such thing. I was the one who drafted and published the articles about turning over envolution management to the community...no one including you stepped up to the plate to do so. So don't give me that crap that I took over and left everyone else out. All I did Denver was suggest that official support sites pick a single person to monitor and particpate on this email list to keep abreast of development changes and issues. Thats all! Sounds to me like your trying to start a flame war or something. Zoom ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email sponsored by: Free pre-built ASP.NET sites including Data Reports, E-commerce, Portals, and Forums are available now. Download today and enter to win an XBOX or Visual Studio .NET. http://aspnet.click-url.com/go/psa00100006ave/direct;at.asp_061203_01/01 _______________________________________________ Envolution-devel mailing list Env...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/envolution-devel |
|
From: Scott K. <sc...@ki...> - 2003-07-06 19:14:59
|
On Sun, 2003-07-06 at 13:06, Denver Prophit Jr. wrote: > I stopped showing up because you were running everything. Wrong the > idea of a organization structure was NOT to dictate to the community but > to be in a better position to handle the community and its direction, > ideas and inputs. > And since your idea wasn't the one consensus agreed upon everyone else is a "power monger"? Is that what you are suggesting Denver? Sounds like a case of sour grapes you have there. Let me tell you about organization. This organization has a structure already. It just wasn't the one you wanted. Instead of having a tall hierarchial structure it remains relativly flat...which is what Brian wanted as well. It doesn't require some IRS Tax designation in order to be a valid organization. > I suggested the 501-3C to Brian for funding non-profit projects like > promotion, paid programmers and the like. I NEVER suggested a company > for profit. If you are looking for a 501-3c then I would suggest you look into supporting the Free Software Foundation or the Opensoftware Development Consortium. They are already in place. They already do what you suggest (which I will assume is your underlying motive). It doesn't mean every opensource project has to organize for the sake of pecuniary measures! And forming yet another non-profit entity is simply unneeded and redunadant. I'll take it one step further Denver. This project was NOT founded upon money issues. I will repeat this again since you don't seem to grasp the concept. This is a volunteer free/open source project...NOT a charitable organization who funds anyone!!!!! Furthermore, this community is an international network of people from all different backgrounds and cultures as well as nations. This means that U.S. 501-3c status means diddly squat in Asia, Europe, and most other countries. So in addition to being redundant, 501-3c wouldn't be practical. Envolution doesn't require some IRS Tax designation in order to be a valid organization. > But here we are again back to calling for organization when > this could have been done a year ago. NO. This is not what is happening. We are simply calling for better communication. Nice try in trying to hijack the context of my original reply that prompted this thread. > Why would I say you took almost > total control and usurped everyone else's job? Because myself and > others who confided in me told me so. Well let's let results speak for themselves cause I surely doubt you can speak for these so called others. FACT ONE: This community is growing. FACT TWO: This community is stable. FACT THREE: Nobody here works "for" envolution so no body here has a "JOB", as you put it, to be usurped! Where and who are those others? Let them speak for themselves! > After it was decided not to go > the route of a organization structure but stick to your idea of a > programmers structure I was asked to promote and market by Brian. Promotion and marketing is not exclusive to your "structured organization". Envolution is almost at 10,000 members by promotion and marketing on an informal level....all since August of 2002. I'd say your arguments are without merit and instead based upon Xaraya like values. If you want 501-3c status then I suggest you go join Xaraya and the DDF, just be sure to assign copyright to any of your work you contribute over to the DDF so THEY can control what happens with your code. That's the kind of structure you sound like you are advocating. > Yet, > everyday no tasks were assign to me and you went ahead in your capacity > as lead programmer and take over marketing and promotion and everything > else under the sun. Hummm. First of all, as Max can attest, ole Zoom was never the lead programmer. And considering we grew from 4 initial people to almost the 10,000 people registered today I can safely say WE (not I) did something right. I am no longer in the day to day management of Envolution Denver. But I am still a founding member of this project and I have been correct way more than I have ever been wrong in my judgments about how a project such as this should be run. As Max will explain to you Brian, Brandon, and I did not give up our interests in Envolution as a project. So you can bank on this...As long as ole Zoom is around I will not allow this project to become like Xaraya or the DDF. So here is the bottom line Denver.If you have such a problem with Envoluton or the way Max, Brian, Brandon, and I founded it..including the underlying values, then why don't you find a place where you would feel more comfortable? This community is not about you...it's not even about me, Max, Brandon, or Brian. It is about free/open software development on an international level. It is working, it is growing, and it is NOT a US IRS legal entity which does nothing but collect money and fund people IT thinks deserves it. Besides that, go tell all of our international support sites that they will have to abide by US Tax law in order to be part of the Envoltuion international network. I'm sure they will quickly let you know how they feel about that. In closing let me remind you that Brian, as you refer to so often, is NOT the leader of Envolution. Four people, of which I am one founded it are the ultimate artibrators in a dispute. Co-Founder Tiraboschi Massimiliano is the project leader as agreed upon by the four founding members after the public elections failed to produce anyone interested in running the project. Envolution always has been, and will continue to be, free for all people. It will not be privatized or commercialized. And in difference to your opinion about being a 501-3c entity under US IRS Tax Law does not mean it is NOT a business. A non-profit entity can and often is a business. It won't work here Denver, and suspect you would be happier elsewhere. Zoom |
|
From: Denver P. Jr. <den...@co...> - 2003-07-06 19:42:46
|
There you go long windily hijacking my words again to suite your need. Never was about ME. You left the project your no longer any kinda nothing except a contributor. Sorry your power hold is gone. Max leads things now. Do I care about that old idea of a 501-C3 now? Not really. I'm happy doing what I do now in my efforts. I can still already see you referring back to yourself as a founder and throwing your weight around as usual. Well you abandoned it because we would not go to object oriented programming like you wanted. Your project failed so I guess you come back trying to usurp the authority you once had. That's my only beef. Stop trying to play king of the hill and play nicely in the sandbox with the rest of us. Sorry my facts were not 100% bullet-proof. We all know how you like to Parle with words. "..happy elsewhere" sorry I'm not going anywhere nice try. I'll ignore any other replies to this thread as I'm already unhappy I started it but if I had to express my feelings anywhere...here would be the best place away from the community forums. -----Original Message----- From: env...@li... [mailto:env...@li...] On Behalf Of Scott Kindley Sent: Sunday, July 06, 2003 2:14 PM To: Evolution-Dev-List Subject: Re: [Envolution-devel] Power Mongers On Sun, 2003-07-06 at 13:06, Denver Prophit Jr. wrote: > I stopped showing up because you were running everything. Wrong the > idea of a organization structure was NOT to dictate to the community but > to be in a better position to handle the community and its direction, > ideas and inputs. > And since your idea wasn't the one consensus agreed upon everyone else is a "power monger"? Is that what you are suggesting Denver? Sounds like a case of sour grapes you have there. Let me tell you about organization. This organization has a structure already. It just wasn't the one you wanted. Instead of having a tall hierarchial structure it remains relativly flat...which is what Brian wanted as well. It doesn't require some IRS Tax designation in order to be a valid organization. > I suggested the 501-3C to Brian for funding non-profit projects like > promotion, paid programmers and the like. I NEVER suggested a company > for profit. If you are looking for a 501-3c then I would suggest you look into supporting the Free Software Foundation or the Opensoftware Development Consortium. They are already in place. They already do what you suggest (which I will assume is your underlying motive). It doesn't mean every opensource project has to organize for the sake of pecuniary measures! And forming yet another non-profit entity is simply unneeded and redunadant. I'll take it one step further Denver. This project was NOT founded upon money issues. I will repeat this again since you don't seem to grasp the concept. This is a volunteer free/open source project...NOT a charitable organization who funds anyone!!!!! Furthermore, this community is an international network of people from all different backgrounds and cultures as well as nations. This means that U.S. 501-3c status means diddly squat in Asia, Europe, and most other countries. So in addition to being redundant, 501-3c wouldn't be practical. Envolution doesn't require some IRS Tax designation in order to be a valid organization. > But here we are again back to calling for organization when > this could have been done a year ago. NO. This is not what is happening. We are simply calling for better communication. Nice try in trying to hijack the context of my original reply that prompted this thread. > Why would I say you took almost > total control and usurped everyone else's job? Because myself and > others who confided in me told me so. Well let's let results speak for themselves cause I surely doubt you can speak for these so called others. FACT ONE: This community is growing. FACT TWO: This community is stable. FACT THREE: Nobody here works "for" envolution so no body here has a "JOB", as you put it, to be usurped! Where and who are those others? Let them speak for themselves! > After it was decided not to go > the route of a organization structure but stick to your idea of a > programmers structure I was asked to promote and market by Brian. Promotion and marketing is not exclusive to your "structured organization". Envolution is almost at 10,000 members by promotion and marketing on an informal level....all since August of 2002. I'd say your arguments are without merit and instead based upon Xaraya like values. If you want 501-3c status then I suggest you go join Xaraya and the DDF, just be sure to assign copyright to any of your work you contribute over to the DDF so THEY can control what happens with your code. That's the kind of structure you sound like you are advocating. > Yet, > everyday no tasks were assign to me and you went ahead in your capacity > as lead programmer and take over marketing and promotion and everything > else under the sun. Hummm. First of all, as Max can attest, ole Zoom was never the lead programmer. And considering we grew from 4 initial people to almost the 10,000 people registered today I can safely say WE (not I) did something right. I am no longer in the day to day management of Envolution Denver. But I am still a founding member of this project and I have been correct way more than I have ever been wrong in my judgments about how a project such as this should be run. As Max will explain to you Brian, Brandon, and I did not give up our interests in Envolution as a project. So you can bank on this...As long as ole Zoom is around I will not allow this project to become like Xaraya or the DDF. So here is the bottom line Denver.If you have such a problem with Envoluton or the way Max, Brian, Brandon, and I founded it..including the underlying values, then why don't you find a place where you would feel more comfortable? This community is not about you...it's not even about me, Max, Brandon, or Brian. It is about free/open software development on an international level. It is working, it is growing, and it is NOT a US IRS legal entity which does nothing but collect money and fund people IT thinks deserves it. Besides that, go tell all of our international support sites that they will have to abide by US Tax law in order to be part of the Envoltuion international network. I'm sure they will quickly let you know how they feel about that. In closing let me remind you that Brian, as you refer to so often, is NOT the leader of Envolution. Four people, of which I am one founded it are the ultimate artibrators in a dispute. Co-Founder Tiraboschi Massimiliano is the project leader as agreed upon by the four founding members after the public elections failed to produce anyone interested in running the project. Envolution always has been, and will continue to be, free for all people. It will not be privatized or commercialized. And in difference to your opinion about being a 501-3c entity under US IRS Tax Law does not mean it is NOT a business. A non-profit entity can and often is a business. It won't work here Denver, and suspect you would be happier elsewhere. Zoom ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email sponsored by: Free pre-built ASP.NET sites including Data Reports, E-commerce, Portals, and Forums are available now. Download today and enter to win an XBOX or Visual Studio .NET. http://aspnet.click-url.com/go/psa00100006ave/direct;at.asp_061203_01/01 _______________________________________________ Envolution-devel mailing list Env...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/envolution-devel |
|
From: <Chr...@t-...> - 2003-07-06 20:28:25
|
Please stop this flaming: I started with a call for help and I got it. It wasn't my intention to import german flaming here. eNvolution is open-source and exactly in that moment, when it wouldn't be no more open-source, I would stop immediatly my engagement. I got very much efforts the last year from open-source, that I want to give somethimng back and promote the open-source ideas against propritary solutions. For me it's a question of moral and informational freedom. Zoom is a founder and will be a founder. He did or does some experiments with other ideas, why not? I can't remember that anybody has been disagreed with his excurs. His experiences can't be nothing else than good for us. We need some organisation, but it's no question of hirarchy, but a question of functionalaty. It should be as flat and powerfull as possible. Am Son, 2003-07-06 um 21.42 schrieb Denver Prophit Jr.: > There you go long windily hijacking my words again to suite your need. > Never was about ME. You left the project your no longer any kinda > nothing except a contributor. Sorry your power hold is gone. Max leads > things now. > > Do I care about that old idea of a 501-C3 now? Not really. I'm happy > doing what I do now in my efforts. I can still already see you > referring back to yourself as a founder and throwing your weight around > as usual. Well you abandoned it because we would not go to object > oriented programming like you wanted. Your project failed so I guess > you come back trying to usurp the authority you once had. > > That's my only beef. Stop trying to play king of the hill and play > nicely in the sandbox with the rest of us. Sorry my facts were not 100% > bullet-proof. We all know how you like to Parle with words. > > "..happy elsewhere" sorry I'm not going anywhere nice try. > > I'll ignore any other replies to this thread as I'm already unhappy I > started it but if I had to express my feelings anywhere...here would be > the best place away from the community forums. > > -----Original Message----- > From: env...@li... > [mailto:env...@li...] On Behalf Of Scott > Kindley > Sent: Sunday, July 06, 2003 2:14 PM > To: Evolution-Dev-List > Subject: Re: [Envolution-devel] Power Mongers > > On Sun, 2003-07-06 at 13:06, Denver Prophit Jr. wrote: > > I stopped showing up because you were running everything. Wrong the > > idea of a organization structure was NOT to dictate to the community > but > > to be in a better position to handle the community and its direction, > > ideas and inputs. > > > > And since your idea wasn't the one consensus agreed upon everyone else > is a "power monger"? Is that what you are suggesting Denver? Sounds like > a case of sour grapes you have there. > > Let me tell you about organization. This organization has a structure > already. It just wasn't the one you wanted. Instead of having a tall > hierarchial structure it remains relativly flat...which is what Brian > wanted as well. It doesn't require some IRS Tax designation in order to > be a valid organization. > > > I suggested the 501-3C to Brian for funding non-profit projects like > > promotion, paid programmers and the like. I NEVER suggested a company > > for profit. > > If you are looking for a 501-3c then I would suggest you look into > supporting the Free Software Foundation or the Opensoftware Development > Consortium. They are already in place. They already do what you suggest > (which I will assume is your underlying motive). It doesn't mean every > opensource project has to organize for the sake of pecuniary measures! > And forming yet another non-profit entity is simply unneeded and > redunadant. > > I'll take it one step further Denver. This project was NOT founded upon > money issues. I will repeat this again since you don't seem to grasp the > concept. This is a volunteer free/open source project...NOT a charitable > organization who funds anyone!!!!! Furthermore, this community is an > international network of people from all different backgrounds and > cultures as well as nations. This means that U.S. 501-3c status means > diddly squat in Asia, Europe, and most other countries. So in addition > to being redundant, 501-3c wouldn't be practical. > > Envolution doesn't require some IRS Tax designation in order to be a > valid organization. > > > But here we are again back to calling for organization when > > this could have been done a year ago. > > NO. This is not what is happening. We are simply calling for better > communication. Nice try in trying to hijack the context of my original > reply that prompted this thread. > > > Why would I say you took almost > > total control and usurped everyone else's job? Because myself and > > others who confided in me told me so. > > Well let's let results speak for themselves cause I surely doubt you can > speak for these so called others. FACT ONE: This community is growing. > FACT TWO: This community is stable. FACT THREE: Nobody here works "for" > envolution so no body here has a "JOB", as you put it, to be usurped! > Where and who are those others? Let them speak for themselves! > > > After it was decided not to go > > the route of a organization structure but stick to your idea of a > > programmers structure I was asked to promote and market by Brian. > > Promotion and marketing is not exclusive to your "structured > organization". Envolution is almost at 10,000 members by promotion and > marketing on an informal level....all since August of 2002. I'd say your > arguments are without merit and instead based upon Xaraya like values. > If you want 501-3c status then I suggest you go join Xaraya and the DDF, > just be sure to assign copyright to any of your work you contribute over > to the DDF so THEY can control what happens with your code. That's the > kind of structure you sound like you are advocating. > > > Yet, > > everyday no tasks were assign to me and you went ahead in your > capacity > > as lead programmer and take over marketing and promotion and > everything > > else under the sun. > > Hummm. First of all, as Max can attest, ole Zoom was never the lead > programmer. And considering we grew from 4 initial people to almost the > 10,000 people registered today I can safely say WE (not I) did something > right. > > I am no longer in the day to day management of Envolution Denver. But I > am still a founding member of this project and I have been correct way > more than I have ever been wrong in my judgments about how a project > such as this should be run. > > As Max will explain to you Brian, Brandon, and I did not give up our > interests in Envolution as a project. So you can bank on this...As long > as ole Zoom is around I will not allow this project to become like > Xaraya or the DDF. > > So here is the bottom line Denver.If you have such a problem with > Envoluton or the way Max, Brian, Brandon, and I founded it..including > the underlying values, then why don't you find a place where you would > feel more comfortable? > > This community is not about you...it's not even about me, Max, Brandon, > or Brian. It is about free/open software development on an international > level. > > It is working, it is growing, and it is NOT a US IRS legal entity which > does nothing but collect money and fund people IT thinks deserves it. > Besides that, go tell all of our international support sites that they > will have to abide by US Tax law in order to be part of the Envoltuion > international network. I'm sure they will quickly let you know how they > feel about that. > > In closing let me remind you that Brian, as you refer to so often, is > NOT the leader of Envolution. Four people, of which I am one founded it > are the ultimate artibrators in a dispute. Co-Founder Tiraboschi > Massimiliano is the project leader as agreed upon by the four founding > members after the public elections failed to produce anyone interested > in running the project. > > Envolution always has been, and will continue to be, free for all > people. It will not be privatized or commercialized. And in difference > to your opinion about being a 501-3c entity under US IRS Tax Law does > not mean it is NOT a business. A non-profit entity can and often is a > business. > > It won't work here Denver, and suspect you would be happier elsewhere. > > Zoom > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email sponsored by: Free pre-built ASP.NET sites including > Data Reports, E-commerce, Portals, and Forums are available now. > Download today and enter to win an XBOX or Visual Studio .NET. > http://aspnet.click-url.com/go/psa00100006ave/direct;at.asp_061203_01/01 > _______________________________________________ > Envolution-devel mailing list > Env...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/envolution-devel > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email sponsored by: Free pre-built ASP.NET sites including > Data Reports, E-commerce, Portals, and Forums are available now. > Download today and enter to win an XBOX or Visual Studio .NET. > http://aspnet.click-url.com/go/psa00100006ave/direct;at.asp_061203_01/01 > _______________________________________________ > Envolution-devel mailing list > Env...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/envolution-devel -- Christoph Schwaeppe mailto:chr...@t-... |
|
From: Scott K. <sc...@ki...> - 2003-07-06 20:41:42
|
On Sun, 2003-07-06 at 15:27, Christoph Schwaeppe wrote: > Please stop this flaming: I started with a call for help and I got it. > It wasn't my intention to import german flaming here. > > eNvolution is open-source and exactly in that moment, when it wouldn't > be no more open-source, I would stop immediatly my engagement. I got > very much efforts the last year from open-source, that I want to give > somethimng back and promote the open-source ideas against propritary > solutions. For me it's a question of moral and informational freedom. > > Zoom is a founder and will be a founder. He did or does some experiments > with other ideas, why not? I can't remember that anybody has been > disagreed with his excurs. His experiences can't be nothing else than > good for us. > > We need some organisation, but it's no question of hirarchy, but a > question of functionalaty. It should be as flat and powerfull as > possible. > Excellent Christoph, I was suggesting we learn to communicate better and more efficiently. That was the idea in my reply that prompted the flaming from Denver. If we can all communicate better and more efficiently we can reach our goals in a more productive and effective manner. A few things we can do to communicate better are: 1) Listen 2) Consider each other as team members, not adversaries 3) Maintain relationships not destroy them 4) Bargain/Negotiate from underlying interests and not positions. Positional barganing has been proven to be ineffective and can seriously damage relationships based on research done at Harvard University. Instead the underlying "intrest" of the position someone takes is what truely matters. 5) Ask for and offer feedback Zoom |
|
From: Burke <bu...@di...> - 2003-07-08 11:46:23
|
I was wondering if anyone has looked into this to possibly incorporate into Envolution -- As described on Postnuke site: http://mods.postnuke.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&s id=1802 "this hack is significantly decrease numbers of SQL queries for modules that use pnModGetVar() function (almost of them)" http://home.postnuke.ru/modules.php?op=modload&name=Downloads&file=index &req=viewdownload&cid=4 |
|
From: Scott K. <sc...@ki...> - 2003-07-06 20:34:33
|
On Sun, 2003-07-06 at 14:42, Denver Prophit Jr. wrote: > There you go long windily hijacking my words again to suite your need. > Never was about ME. Well you typed em. I simply pointed out what you later admit to be "facts that are not 100% bullet-proof"...meaning incorrect facts. > You left the project your no longer any kinda > nothing except a contributor. Hum. Brian "left" it too, yet he seems to have some kind of "power" over your opinions. After all you keep bringing him up. What is your facination with power anyway? After all the post I made that prompted your rage suggested better communication between members of the network. As for your personal insult that I am a "nothing"....I'll take that as a childish remark that illustrates how you marginalize people. I don't think you are a "nothing" Denver. In fact I think you are a bright and talented person with a lot of genuine ideas. But thinking things through from other peoples perspective is not a strong suit of yours. > Sorry your power hold is gone. Max leads > things now. Yes Max is the project leader. I never had any more "power" than any other member of the community. That is by design by the way. > > Do I care about that old idea of a 501-C3 now? Not really. Then why bring it up when the original posts where about commuinicating between develoeprs! Nothing in those posts or this new thread you started have anything to do with legal status such as 501-C3. > I'm happy > doing what I do now in my efforts. I can still already see you > referring back to yourself as a founder and throwing your weight around > as usual. Well you abandoned it because we would not go to object > oriented programming like you wanted. I didn't abandon anything. My life doesn't revolve around software. If you think suggesting that we better communicate is "throwing my weight around" then so be it. If you think because I referred to myself as a founding member of this project is "throwing my weight around" then so be that too. News flash Denver. I don't code in OOP. Brian does! He is the one who was pushing OOP. In fact the outrageous silliness of your assertion that "I" code anything discredits you to a level you simply won't understand. I code very, very little in PHP. > Your project failed so I guess > you come back trying to usurp the authority you once had. I never left. Just resigned from day to day management. And my project with my business associates has not failed and has nothing to do with envolution in any way. It is progressing and comtinues to progress. My associates and I meet almost every night. Of course you wouldn't know anything about it since you are not involved in it and have no damn clue what your talking about. > > That's my only beef. Stop trying to play king of the hill and play > nicely in the sandbox with the rest of us. Maybe you can realize the sandbox built wasn't the one you envisioned. Maybe you should take your own advice and "play nicly too" cause all I did to spark your recent posts was to suggest better communication. If suggesting better communication extrapolates into playing "king of the hill" then we should all be playing king of the hill more often. > Sorry my facts were not 100% > bullet-proof. We all know how you like to Parle with words. Damn facts always seem to get in your way don't they. Funny that factual information is important. Maybe you should pay attention to the facts a little closer instead of slinging FUD and misinformation. > > "..happy elsewhere" sorry I'm not going anywhere nice try. Good. I don't want anyone to leave. But I don't want you to be unhappy either. If Envolution is an environment which makes you so unhappy then either produce a solution that the community as a whole will benefit from or find a plce you will be happy. > > I'll ignore any other replies to this thread as I'm already unhappy I > started it but if I had to express my feelings anywhere...here would be > the best place away from the community forums. > Expressing feelings based on facts that are not "100% bullet-proof", as you admitted, are what cause ill will and problems. If you have a grievance based on facts you can back up I'll be the first person in line to make sure they get heard. If all you want is to create personal attacks on specific people then take it to those persons directly and discontinue to foul up development resources with misinformation and emotional discourse. Zoom |
|
From: TiMax <ma...@em...> - 2003-07-06 19:59:13
|
On 06 Jul 2003 14:14:25 -0500, Scott Kindley wrote: > As Max will explain to you Brian, Brandon, and I did not give up our > interests in Envolution as a project. So you can bank on this...As long > as ole Zoom is around I will not allow this project to become like > Xaraya or the DDF. I agree ...... we don't want be like Xaraya and i work very hard to make= eNvolution not a single site but an International network of support, developement sites distribuite in all= world and not like Xaraya, Postnuke etc with all concentrated on one site. That is very very hard work to make it working good .... but now it start to= work nice and we are able to attract developers from all country and sure also developers not able to speak= english ...... like me :) So ..... some part of envo can be made in Italy, made in Germany, made in= France, made in Indonesia etc etc and writed from people don't know one word in english language ..... .... more .... eNvolution can be multilanguage and i don't talk only about= defines languages, lot of times for one language we must change some code to adapt it to other languages, or we must= add or delete something to be really multilanguage... > Envolution always has been, and will continue to be, free for all > people. It will not be privatized or commercialized. But sure you can make money with eNvolution, for example you can give some= services installations, personalization etc with eNvolution and make money that is nice ...... Another example, me and other envo programmers want to start with one= association/club/organization ... call it like you want to share some professional works, code search and found professional= help, release quality certifications etc ... but that is a SEPARATE thing from eNvolution project and is not a part of= eNvolution project. So eNvolution can be also a mode to make a money ... but not merge it with= eNvolution project TiMax |
×
Want the latest updates on software, tech news, and AI?
Get latest updates about software, tech news, and AI from SourceForge directly in your inbox once a month.
Thanks for helping keep SourceForge clean.
X