[Sugar-devel] [IAEP] [SLOB] meeting reminder
sebastian at fuentelibre.org
Sat Apr 2 06:03:03 EDT 2016
I will try to be succinct in answering the questions you raise.
By Walter's apparent vote of no confidence in me and your insistence of
having done no wrong I realize I will have to work with you if I want to
get things done.
I like to work openly. My problem with your nomination is that you
already have insisted to set yourself up as a bottleneck, and blocked
for six months the efforts of Awajún language locale (look for my emails
to you from Nov and Dec 2014 here):
I suppose paying you would warrant we get from you a quality timely
service because it is perceived a paid manager is required to submit
reports on work done.
Perhaps. I don't read you'll quit your day job for this position.
Central control has not worked very well for Sugar Labs and this seems
to me like more of the same. The translation workflow itself (pootle
etc) replicates a centralized mental model.
Sincerely I appreciate every bit of energy you put into Sugar Labs and
would not want to undermine the tremendous contributions you have put
forward in the past and continue to do. Being paid, or not, is
independent of being a volunteer. Even paid, I believe we are all
volunteers here because we do what we love, and every bit counts.
After all these years I know better than to try to go against Walter's
wishes. I hereby withdraw my candidacy for the Translation Manager
position. I look forward to working with you on the aspects of the
position which I have the possibility and inclination to impact the
most, such as revamping our translation pipeline (fixing our tools,
removing bottlenecks), to get Pootle into shape and documenting a fully
offline scenario that will benefit native language efforts the most.
Hopefully we'll see a motion and a vote in this direction soon, and we
can put our differences aside. Apologies for any excess of passion.
PS: Please don't read sarcasm in my words, I actively try to avoid it.
On 30/03/16 13:47, Chris Leonard wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 1:11 PM, Sebastian Silva
> <sebastian at fuentelibre.org> wrote:
>> On 30/03/16 10:57, Chris Leonard wrote:
>>> Walter put it on the agenda for discussion at the SLOB meeting,
>>> obviously he plans to explain, I don't see why you would expect him
>>> reply to your widely broadcast message at this time, simply attend the
>>> SLOB meeting or read the transcript after and then raise further
>>> questions if you have them. Two days is not too long to wait and
>>> Walter is a busy guy.
>> After how she was ignored in the last meeting  and the fact that the
>> proposal still is NOT in the agenda, I think she has a good reason to be
>>  http://meeting.sugarlabs.org/sugar-meeting/2016-03-04#i_2862389
> Sebastian, to quote your wife's e-mail "After a long talk with Edgar,
> I am very worried that you keep asking for funds on his name.". In
> rhetorical terms, what you are doing is known as misdirection. I was
> speaking to her expressed concerns about Edgar, not about her "Sugar
> Translation Projects Fund" proposal. I did not feel it necessary to
> address that point as Walter's agenda:
> 1. Google Summer of Code status
> 2. Wiki Cleanup Party planning
> 3. Request from Edgar Quispe to attend Traducción e interpretación en
> las lenguas originarias del Perú meeting in Lima
> 4. I18n manager discussion
> 5. Proposal from Samson Goddy re i18n in Nigeria
> 6. YOUR TOPIC HERE
> includes an invitation for additional topic to be added (i.e. YOUR
> TOPIC HERE), but perhaps that was lost in translation.
>>> As for your speaking on Edgar's behalf about his plans, I think we can
>>> let Edgar speak for himself, he is a long standing member of the Sugar
>>> Labs L10n community and although it is unfortunate that some of the
>>> automated history of his contributions was lost in the Pootle
>>> migration, I can attest for the fact that he has submitted in excess
>>> of 20,000 words of Aymara L10n to Sugar. The work he has done in
>>> Aymara provides the best model we have of how further funding of L10n
>>> should be done. The exact terms under which Sugar Labs funded his
>>> work have been widely distributed.
>> Your long email is filled with errors.
> Please be specific, I welcome the opportunity to address any mistakes
> I may have made.
>> Please read the following emails (use an autotranslator and ask if you don't understand, sorry,
>> sugar-devel is supposed to be bilingual) in order to get an idea about
>> the issues surrounding the Aymara translation in Peru. Those emails had
>> Roger Gonzalo the translator hired by the Ministry of Education in copy.
>> In short, no, the Aymara work done last year from Sugar Labs is not
>> exemplary at all.
> Do I detect an attempt at sarcasm in that autotranslator comment?
> That's not at all collegial, My Spanish is indeed a bit rusty, but I
> muddle through. When one works in i18n/L10n one must be aware of (and
> sensitive to) the role of language and culture, as well as the fact
> that some things, like sarcasm, do not translate well.
> Yes, in June of 2015, I did miss reading two messages posted to
> sugar-devel that had no further on-list follow-up. I'm afraid my only
> defense to that accusation is that there were 132 messages from that
> list in that month and these two escaped my notice. In retrospect,
> I'm sorry I missed the opportunity to comment in a more timely manner.
> This doesn't seem to be the right place for it, but the issues you
> raise in those messages do not seem to be either egregious in number
> or all that unexpected to someone with broader L10n project management
> experience, it is part and parcel of the task. I'm glad that you
> addressed them, but they in no way tarnish the value of the extensive
> work done by Edgar.
>> Seeing so many misconceptions from your part and an unwillingness to
>> engage with the actual local community, I am concerned that you may not
>> be the ideal candidate for a Localization Team leader if this will be a
>> paid position. I am passionate about the subject and knowledgeable about
>> its intricacies and have been underfunded for a long time to engage in
>> this work, therefore I hereby announce that I will ask for this position
>> in opposition to you.
> Please be specific about any misconceptions on my part.
> I must strenuously object to this statement "unwillingness to engage
> with the actual local community" It is entirely unsubstantiated and
> frankly offensive. Is this how you would treat all volunteers to
> Sugar Labs if given a funded position? I feel no particular need to
> defend my record of interactions with local language communities
> against your entirely unwarranted and self-serving attack. Shame on
> you, you know better, you seem to have let your "passion" get the
> better of you.
>> For transparency I have been paid ~3300 US dollars by the Ministry of
>> Education of Peru for integrating translations, writing patches for
>> Sugar, training translators, writing a manual, maintaining Pootle, and
>> releasing a localized OLPC OS build from Nov 2014 to Jan 2016. The fact
>> that you take credit for some of this work, is lamentable too.
> Good for you, I think it is great if people can leverage their skills
> and make some income from working on Sugar, it is a pity that Activity
> Central folded, I had actually seen it as a very positive sign of
> growth for the Sugar community. For the sake of transparency, I have
> received $0 for my Sugar Labs work to date, although I did go
> out-of-pocket several thousand dollars for my trip to Sugar Camp Lima
> in 2010. That was a very productive meeting that you played a key
> role in organizing, not forgetting our wonderful hosts at EscueLab and
> the others who participated, thanks again.
> Please describe a circumstance in which I claimed credit for your work
> on Peruvian languages, no one would lament that more than I and I
> would certainly welcome the opportunity to set the record straight.
>> Any further question from the SLOBs or the translation committee are
>> more than welcome as transparency is indeed very important.
>> I will write a proposal and share it publicly as everything in Sugar
>> Labs should be in the first place.
> Finally, something we can agree on, let's try to build from there.
More information about the Sugar-devel