Re: [office] Status of list discussions/Suggestion howto proceed

["Florian Reuter" <freuter@novell.com>]

Hi Oliver,

in our internal communication we tried to work out whether there will be a consensus or not. I explicitly pointed you to
the fact that there is a difference between the consensus proposal and the "original" proposal.
We then tried to figure out whether we can find a consensus. It turned out that we couldn't find one. It failed, cause
of the style<=>counter relationship I demanded in order to fullfill my reqs F1 and F2.

You then posted the evaluation of the reqs wrt. to the consensus altough you internally communicated to me that you
don't see a consensus based on the consensus proposal.

So basically you took the consensus proposal of the table yourself.

I understand that everybody is sick and tired of the numbering issue and so I kind of understand your emotional
communication.

I'm sorry that this ended up on the public TC mailinglist.

~Florian



>>> Oliver-Rainer Wittmann - Software Engineer - Sun Microsystems <Oliver-Rainer.Wittmann@Sun.COM> 03/26/07 12:27 PM >>>
Florian Reuter wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> wrt. to Oliver analysis.
> 
> I posted a "consensus proposal" as basis for consensus discussion some time ago. This consens was not apprechiated by
> Oliver and Thomas. So the consensus is "off the table" I guess.
> 
> So it makes no sense that Oliver evaluated the reqs wrt. to the consensus proposal, which in fact may have some
problems
> in it. Again, it was meant to be a starting point for a consensus discussion. 
>

I take this statement as very bad habit and as destructive work, because:
- you never takes back your proposal, which you have posted with your 
consensus suggestion, until now.
- you didn't tell me, that I had evaluated the in your eyes wrong 
proposal on *last Thursday noon (MET)*. I had send you my evaluation of 
your proposal in advance before I posted it 8 1/2 hours later on the 
mailing list in order to give you the possibility to give me early feedback.

I'm personally very disappointed about the fact, that I have again find 
out, that constructive collaboration with you isn't possible.

> So when you refer to my proposal please refer to the "original one" and not the "consensus suggestion".
> 

Which one is your "original one"?
The last one, which you've posted - see 
http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/office/200703/msg00262.html -, 
doesn't equal any of the previously posted ones.


Regards, Oliver.