Re: Blanking sheet (was: Re: [jox] Chaos or transparency?)
- From: Mathieu ONeil <mathieu.oneil anu.edu.au>
- Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2011 15:36:51 +0100
[Converted from multipart/alternative]
My point has been all along: there is no problem with alternative solutions - for example I agree, as I wrote privately to Stefan earlier, that submitting contribution _summaries_ through the website would be a good idea.
However _right now_ I and most others are focused on getting the journal out. What I should have said is: "We need a 'time out' for the process stuff. Let's come back to it once we have accomplished the immediate goal."
The problem is that when people are upset mis-communication may occur and this simple message was not said.
Stefan now feels he has to step back. Before anything else I want to say that what makes this project unique is the openness which he has consistently reminded us is a core value. This and his hard programming work have been invaluable.
So, all I want to say is: let's cool down. If there are consensual ways to improve the process, we can create a space on the site to review them and I sincerely hope Stefan will eventually change his mind and reconsider his position.
@Stefan: In the meantime I need to clarify whether you are still OK with providing technical assistance with site management?
----- Original Message -----
From: Stefan Merten <smerten oekonux.de>
Date: Sunday, January 30, 2011 12:28 pm
Subject: Blanking sheet (was: Re: [jox] Chaos or transparency?)
To: journal oekonux.org
5 days ago Athina Karatzogianni wrote:
Reading this exchange I am wondering whether we can have a new
beginning> here, a sort of blank sheet and restart by taking on
board only what has
been achieved so far, without any other useless baggage.
Well, I thought about it and after another sleepless night I think
Athina is right here.
I tried to help the journal by having a modern web based solution
which is easy to use for all parties and creates transparency as a
side effect. I really started this a year ago. This approach has been
ignored and is still refused. So it certainly falls in the
"other useless baggage".
I agree with Mathieu when he says that it is useful to do what works.
I learned my approach did not work so I finally give up. From my
understanding of peer production it's the maintainer's duty to keep
the project on track and I feel Mathieu is doing this.
I had fun thinking about and proposing a good solution. This is the
type of reward which is in inherent in Selbstentfaltung and so there
are no bitter feelings about the energy I put into this. After all
creation of software is also my job and I really like my job :-)
as the saying goes: "If you recognize the horse you mounted is dead,
unmount." I have really enough fields of Selbstentfaltung which will
benefit from this :-) .
I just blanked the sheet insofar as I removed everything which would
have been part of a solution I had in mind. This is good insofar as
exactly these pieces were those which Mathieu regularly stumbled over.
For instance there are no annoying update mails any more when new
submissions are done. Mathieu created the editor log which might
good alternative for this.
Since I failed so deeply I feel I can't help with another solution.
Well, Mathieu has all the solutions anyway and so in the end my
support for another solution is not needed. Mathieu has admin rights
in the journal's Plone instance so he can do anything I can. The same
applies to the mailing lists.
The infrastructure for the journal is donated by project Oekonux and
this doesn't change just because I as a member of the journal project
can't help a solution on top of this infrastructure. A result of this
is that I'm of course ready to care about platform problems and
Plone products are needed of course I will care about this too (this
needs root access to the server and insofar is special). May be Toni's
solution for instance (however, Toni, please note that this
Plone is a
3.x version - not 4).
@Mathieu: Since you appreciate such information here it is: No, I
won't respond to any mail which has any part of a possible
I'll stay in the project because I'm still interested in the project.
However, I'll step back to the second row and hope that a big
hinderance for success is removed by this step.
Dr Mathieu O'Neil
Adjunct Research Fellow
Australian Demographic and Social Research Institute
College of Arts and Social Science
The Australian National University