BlackBox Component Builder Forums

The Center defines its needs for the working process: forum, site etc. (The decision about main Center tasks which defines the technical needs is the first and foremost question. And it is undefined yet, isn't it? Festina lente.)

The tech-support subgroup is the Center members who is ready to handle this needs and take responsibility for that. Then such group is formed by Center, it's members must decide what to do to suffice Center needs (under the supervision by some other Center member(s)). The voting for some tasks (which is pure technical) now by all members looks strange. Someone who will not do anything is deciding that to do...

-----
We propose the following tasks we can handle for the Center:
1) Deploy the project resources on the hosting selected by Center (or selected by us if this task assigned also).
2) Mantain the servers / web hosting.
3) Mantain the site & forum (configuring and so on).

I have added you to Administrators group. Welcome to tune up and support the forum with your experience.

There are new group "maintainers", that is more clear than "center". The new forum with write access only for this group.

OberonCore wrote: We propose the following tasks we can handle for the Center:
1) Deploy the project resources on the hosting selected by Center (or selected by us if this task assigned also).
2) Mantain the servers / web hosting.
3) Mantain the site & forum (configuring and so on).

OberonCore, I second your proposal. Thank you for your willingness to work and your adding your understanding of how to collaborate efficiently.

Ivan Denisov wrote:I have added you to Administrators group. Welcome to tune up and support the forum with your experience.

There are new group "maintainers", that is more clear than "center". The new forum with write access only for this group.

I really don't know how to communicate with you any better, Ivan. What you did here, is absolutely not what OberonCore wanted you to do, and it is against the principles of a group endeavor.

Let me try again to explain:

OberonCore offered to provide certain services, in the case the center members decided to authorize OberonCore to do this. And don't mistake my words: I am happy they did, and if they had not volunteered, I would have asked them if they could offer it. So what OberonCore wanted was a discussion and subsequent vote deciding if and which of the services offered by OberonCore should be actually provided by OberonCore, and under what rules. (OberonCore: If I misunderstood your proposal, please correct me).

What you did was to give OberonCore some rights and duties without empowerment by the center members. No discussion, no authorization, no empowerment, no rules.

You tried this some time ago, and OberonCore rejected, asking you by what authority you granted them administrative rights.
Why do you think that they will accept your handling of affairs now?

The facts are still the same: You do not have this authority on your own. Only the center members as a group have this authority. And nobody can have authority without empowerment.

I agree fully, again, to OberonCore: Festina lente. Giving OberonCore admin rights to the forum without authority is rushing things only.

ReneK wrote:I agree fully, again, to OberonCore: Festina lente. Giving OberonCore admin rights to the forum without authority is rushing things only.

Please, start this discussion if you think it has porpoise. Peter also wants admin rights. The discussion can make sense now when few people are pretending for same roles.

This is the only thing you picked out of all I wrote in this post? Fascinating.

The main question is not: "Who wants to be admin? Let's vote!"

The main question still is: "What do we need?"

OberonCore made this clear saying:

The decision about main Center tasks which defines the technical needs is the first and foremost question. And it is undefined yet, isn't it?