Mailing List Archive

On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 03:17:49PM -0400, Sunny B wrote:
> Council has decided to allow a limited number banners on maemo.org for
> related projects. There is already a banner for the 2011 Coding
> Competition. A banner has been prepared for the Cordia project. And
> council has approved the Community SSU for a third banner, although a banner
> has not yet been submitted for review. The following set of rules are
> proposed to serve as guidance for those who might consider submitting a
> banner to maemo.org in the future. Constructive comments on the rules are
> requested.
>
> - Banner must be for a project with a clear and compelling purpose.

How are you defining "compelling"? This seems like it will be easily misunderstood.

> - The purpose of project must be related to Maemo or a maemo device.
> - The project must maintain an online presence at maemo.org or own web
> site.
> - The project must be generally open source or open governance.

"Generally"? Don't you mean "specifically"? What are you trying to avoid,
banning an app that requires paid support?

> - The banner must not violate any trademark or copyright.

You'll never be able to know for sure. You can only check if it has appropriate
copyright attribution and assume it is correct. (Plausible deniability is what
Maemo needs if there copyright claims against something you thought was okay.)

> - The project agrees that maemo.org incurs no responsibility by posting
> banner.

How on earth are you going to absolve yourselves of responsibility for
posting the banner? In some European countries its been proposed that bloggers
register with the government. What makes you think that the council or those
in charge of maemo.org won't be responsible for what they post on their web site?

> - A maemo.org member in good standing must be designated as primary
> contact.
> - The project agrees to answer queries from Council regarding project.
> - Banner may be removed at any time and for any reason by Council.

So the council can remove anything they want, without supplying a reason,
but bears no responsibility?

Really?

This sounds like military dictatorship in the Maghreb.

Regards,

Jeremiah
_______________________________________________
maemo-community mailing list
maemo-community@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community

Well, Jeremiah had the only negative comments. I don't know what Maghreb
is, but military dictatorship is a bit of hyperbole. Since banners weren't
even invited before, and now they are (subject to some rules), the criticism
seems misplaced. In any event, I've tried to utilize the constructive parts
and revised the rules to be as below. They are intended to prevent the
website from being overrun with ads for fart apps and such.

- Banner should be for a project with a clear and compelling purpose.
- The purpose of project should be related to Maemo or a maemo device.
- The project should maintain an online presence at maemo.org or own web
site.
- The project should be generally open source or open governance.
- The banner should not violate any trademark or copyright.
- The project agrees that posting a banner to support a project does not
make maemo.org a sponsor or otherwise responsible for the project.
- A maemo.org member in good standing must be designated as primary
contact.
- The project agrees to answer queries from Council regarding project.
- All requests for banners (and objections) shall be directed to Council
who shall determine whether the banner satisfies these rules and the length
of time the banner will be posted.



On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 5:00 PM, Jeremiah C. Foster <
jeremiah@jeremiahfoster.com> wrote:

> On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 03:17:49PM -0400, Sunny B wrote:
> > Council has decided to allow a limited number banners on maemo.org for
> > related projects. There is already a banner for the 2011 Coding
> > Competition. A banner has been prepared for the Cordia project. And
> > council has approved the Community SSU for a third banner, although a
> banner
> > has not yet been submitted for review. The following set of rules are
> > proposed to serve as guidance for those who might consider submitting a
> > banner to maemo.org in the future. Constructive comments on the rules
> are
> > requested.
> >
> > - Banner must be for a project with a clear and compelling purpose.
>
> How are you defining "compelling"? This seems like it will be easily
> misunderstood.
>

We are not defining "compelling". We'll leave that to the dictionary.

>
> > - The purpose of project must be related to Maemo or a maemo device.
> > - The project must maintain an online presence at maemo.org or own
> web
> > site.
> > - The project must be generally open source or open governance.
>
> "Generally"? Don't you mean "specifically"? What are you trying to
> avoid,
> banning an app that requires paid support?
>

No. Even Maemo itself is not completely and specifically open source.

>
> > - The banner must not violate any trademark or copyright.
>
> You'll never be able to know for sure. You can only check if it has
> appropriate
> copyright attribution and assume it is correct. (Plausible deniability
> is what
> Maemo needs if there copyright claims against something you thought was
> okay.)
>

Granted, you'll not know for sure. But this is to make explicit the policy
on such matters.

>
> > - The project agrees that maemo.org incurs no responsibility by
> posting
> > banner.
>
> How on earth are you going to absolve yourselves of responsibility for
> posting the banner? In some European countries its been proposed that
> bloggers
> register with the government. What makes you think that the council or
> those
> in charge of maemo.org won't be responsible for what they post on
> their web site?
>

Rules are amended to clarify that posting a banner does not imply
responsibility *for the project*.

>
> > - A maemo.org member in good standing must be designated as primary
> > contact.
> > - The project agrees to answer queries from Council regarding project.
> > - Banner may be removed at any time and for any reason by Council.
>
> So the council can remove anything they want, without supplying a
> reason,
> but bears no responsibility?
>
> The rules don't say a reason doesn't have to be supplied. And yes Council
is responsible for banner decisions. The webmasters don't want to be (and
shouldn't be) in the position of deciding which banners get posted and for
how long.


> Really?
>
> This sounds like military dictatorship in the Maghreb.
>

Lighten up.

>
> Regards,
>
> Jeremiah
> _______________________________________________
> maemo-community mailing list
> maemo-community@maemo.org
> https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community
>

This is a very, very misguided decision and ought to be entered into only with consensus from the wider Maemo community.

Look at any Open Source project's web site, i.e. MeeGo, Fedora, Debian, you won't see any banners.

I'll answer your replies inline below.

On Apr 28, 2011, at 14:43, Sunny B wrote:

> Well, Jeremiah had the only negative comments. I don't know what Maghreb is, but military dictatorship is a bit of hyperbole. Since banners weren't even invited before, and now they are (subject to some rules), the criticism seems misplaced. In any event, I've tried to utilize the constructive parts and revised the rules to be as below. They are intended to prevent the website from being overrun with ads for fart apps and such.
> • Banner should be for a project with a clear and compelling purpose.
> • The purpose of project should be related to Maemo or a maemo device.
> • The project should maintain an online presence at maemo.org or own web site.
> • The project should be generally open source or open governance.
> • The banner should not violate any trademark or copyright.
> • The project agrees that posting a banner to support a project does not make maemo.org a sponsor or otherwise responsible for the project.
> • A maemo.org member in good standing must be designated as primary contact.
> • The project agrees to answer queries from Council regarding project.
> • All requests for banners (and objections) shall be directed to Council who shall determine whether the banner satisfies these rules and the length of time the banner will be posted.
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 5:00 PM, Jeremiah C. Foster <jeremiah@jeremiahfoster.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 03:17:49PM -0400, Sunny B wrote:
> > Council has decided to allow a limited number banners on maemo.org for
> > related projects. There is already a banner for the 2011 Coding
> > Competition. A banner has been prepared for the Cordia project. And
> > council has approved the Community SSU for a third banner, although a banner
> > has not yet been submitted for review. The following set of rules are
> > proposed to serve as guidance for those who might consider submitting a
> > banner to maemo.org in the future. Constructive comments on the rules are
> > requested.
> >
> > - Banner must be for a project with a clear and compelling purpose.
>
> How are you defining "compelling"? This seems like it will be easily misunderstood.
>
> We are not defining "compelling". We'll leave that to the dictionary.

So you are going to be intentionally vague about what can go on the site?
>
> > - The purpose of project must be related to Maemo or a maemo device.
> > - The project must maintain an online presence at maemo.org or own web
> > site.
> > - The project must be generally open source or open governance.
>
> "Generally"? Don't you mean "specifically"? What are you trying to avoid,
> banning an app that requires paid support?
>
> No. Even Maemo itself is not completely and specifically open source.

Wrong. This is an open source project and even the Maemo council does not have a clear mandate to litter the web page with ads. If this happens, there will be a fork of the project and there is nothing you can do to stop it, it is allowable through the software licenses of the project.
>
> > - The banner must not violate any trademark or copyright.
>
> You'll never be able to know for sure. You can only check if it has appropriate
> copyright attribution and assume it is correct. (Plausible deniability is what
> Maemo needs if there copyright claims against something you thought was okay.)
>
> Granted, you'll not know for sure. But this is to make explicit the policy on such matters.
>
> > - The project agrees that maemo.org incurs no responsibility by posting
> > banner.
>
> How on earth are you going to absolve yourselves of responsibility for
> posting the banner? In some European countries its been proposed that bloggers
> register with the government. What makes you think that the council or those
> in charge of maemo.org won't be responsible for what they post on their web site?
>
> Rules are amended to clarify that posting a banner does not imply responsibility for the project.

This is not a legal strategy. You may open up maemo.org to legal action if you fail to determine provenance or accuracy of the content of the ads.
>
> > - A maemo.org member in good standing must be designated as primary
> > contact.
> > - The project agrees to answer queries from Council regarding project.
> > - Banner may be removed at any time and for any reason by Council.
>
> So the council can remove anything they want, without supplying a reason,
> but bears no responsibility?
>
> The rules don't say a reason doesn't have to be supplied. And yes Council is responsible for banner decisions. The webmasters don't want to be (and shouldn't be) in the position of deciding which banners get posted and for how long.
>
> Really?
>
> This sounds like military dictatorship in the Maghreb.
>
> Lighten up.

Nope. It is you who need to take this much more seriously. Advertising on the maemo website will put the final nail in the coffin of Maemo and you'll bear the responsibility.

Regards,

Jeremiah
_______________________________________________
maemo-community mailing list
maemo-community@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community

On Friday 29 April 2011 13:10:32 you wrote:
> This is a very, very misguided decision and ought to be entered into only
> with consensus from the wider Maemo community.
>
> Look at any Open Source project's web site, i.e. MeeGo, Fedora, Debian, you
> won't see any banners.

? I'm not sure I follow. Fedora is littered with RedHat and other sponsor
banners, MeeGo has half a dozen textual banners (supported by Novel,
Telefonica, etc), hell, even Debian has an ISP sponsor banner in the visible
section of it's very first page. IANAL, but it doesn't seem to be a problem for
any FOSS projects. maemo.org sported (and still does) a Forum Nokia banner on
the first page for years and nobody got hurt. The bottom line is - this is not
about ads, but cross-promotion. I'll leave the wording for the legally more
inclined folks, but what the Council wants is that if you have a
project/initiative that you think would benefit maemo.org and vice versa, cool,
let's do something about it, but we will not do spam ads, SEO schemes, pills,
and silly stuff of the sorts. To reiterate, this is nothing new, it's just that
there was an initative to make some more formal guidelines of what kind of
stuff we want there (and yes, we do get completely bogus requests/spam, which
we currently dismiss ad-hoc - I don't see how that's better than the
proposal). That said, wording clarifications and such that make the
goals/workings of any present or future banners are more than welcome.

Best regards,
Attila Csipa
_______________________________________________
maemo-community mailing list
maemo-community@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community

On Apr 29, 2011, at 12:49, Attila Csipa wrote:

> On Friday 29 April 2011 13:10:32 you wrote:
>> This is a very, very misguided decision and ought to be entered into only
>> with consensus from the wider Maemo community.
>>
>> Look at any Open Source project's web site, i.e. MeeGo, Fedora, Debian, you
>> won't see any banners.
>
> ? I'm not sure I follow. Fedora is littered with RedHat and other sponsor
> banners, MeeGo has half a dozen textual banners (supported by Novel,
> Telefonica, etc), hell, even Debian has an ISP sponsor banner in the visible
> section of it's very first page. IANAL, but it doesn't seem to be a problem for
> any FOSS projects. maemo.org sported (and still does) a Forum Nokia banner on
> the first page for years and nobody got hurt. The bottom line is - this is not
> about ads, but cross-promotion. I'll leave the wording for the legally more
> inclined folks, but what the Council wants is that if you have a
> project/initiative that you think would benefit maemo.org and vice versa, cool,
> let's do something about it, but we will not do spam ads, SEO schemes, pills,
> and silly stuff of the sorts. To reiterate, this is nothing new, it's just that
> there was an initative to make some more formal guidelines of what kind of
> stuff we want there (and yes, we do get completely bogus requests/spam, which
> we currently dismiss ad-hoc - I don't see how that's better than the
> proposal). That said, wording clarifications and such that make the
> goals/workings of any present or future banners are more than welcome.

The wording has to be explicit. It has to say we won't host ads, but we will host relevant sponsorship requests. That seems quite reasonable. You ought to look at how these other projects do this and what their policies are instead of re-inventing the wheel. You should also disseminate the proposal to the wider community - this _is_ an open source project whether the council likes to think so or not. From the front page: "Maemo Community is an open source community developing software around the Maemo platform."

If you're going to call for sponsorship or if sponsors are going to put banners on the site, then there has to be an obvious benefit to maemo. In the past it was Nokia who paid for the site hosting, if they're still doing that then fine. Since they founded the project they can pretty much do as they please, but if you're going to run the council as an open source body, you should have an open budget like SPI does. And you should make sure there is a consensus around your decisions to use the community property, namely maemo.org.

How do you know that those people whose software maemo.org hosts even will allow you do host "banners"? I mean, the only reason people come to maemo.org is because of the software on their devices. That is based on the Linux kernel and the Debian packaging tools and the GNU userland, there is very little maemo on maemo.org. What about supporting those projects who have supported maemo with their free software? Or is this just a way to lay the groundwork for paid ads and pet projects?

Regards,

Jeremiah
_______________________________________________
maemo-community mailing list
maemo-community@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community

On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 8:14 AM, Jeremiah Foster <
jeremiah@jeremiahfoster.com> wrote:

>
> On Apr 29, 2011, at 12:49, Attila Csipa wrote:
>
> > On Friday 29 April 2011 13:10:32 you wrote:
> >> This is a very, very misguided decision and ought to be entered into
> only
> >> with consensus from the wider Maemo community.
> >>
> >> Look at any Open Source project's web site, i.e. MeeGo, Fedora, Debian,
> you
> >> won't see any banners.
> >
> > ? I'm not sure I follow. Fedora is littered with RedHat and other sponsor
> > banners, MeeGo has half a dozen textual banners (supported by Novel,
> > Telefonica, etc), hell, even Debian has an ISP sponsor banner in the
> visible
> > section of it's very first page. IANAL, but it doesn't seem to be a
> problem for
> > any FOSS projects. maemo.org sported (and still does) a Forum Nokia
> banner on
> > the first page for years and nobody got hurt. The bottom line is - this
> is not
> > about ads, but cross-promotion. I'll leave the wording for the legally
> more
> > inclined folks, but what the Council wants is that if you have a
> > project/initiative that you think would benefit maemo.org and vice
> versa, cool,
> > let's do something about it, but we will not do spam ads, SEO schemes,
> pills,
> > and silly stuff of the sorts. To reiterate, this is nothing new, it's
> just that
> > there was an initative to make some more formal guidelines of what kind
> of
> > stuff we want there (and yes, we do get completely bogus requests/spam,
> which
> > we currently dismiss ad-hoc - I don't see how that's better than the
> > proposal). That said, wording clarifications and such that make the
> > goals/workings of any present or future banners are more than welcome.
>
> The wording has to be explicit. It has to say we won't host ads, but we
> will host relevant sponsorship requests. That seems quite reasonable. You
> ought to look at how these other projects do this and what their policies
> are instead of re-inventing the wheel. You should also disseminate the
> proposal to the wider community - this _is_ an open source project whether
> the council likes to think so or not. From the front page: "Maemo Community
> is an open source community developing software around the Maemo platform."
>
> If you're going to call for sponsorship or if sponsors are going to put
> banners on the site, then there has to be an obvious benefit to maemo. In
> the past it was Nokia who paid for the site hosting, if they're still doing
> that then fine. Since they founded the project they can pretty much do as
> they please, but if you're going to run the council as an open source body,
> you should have an open budget like SPI does. And you should make sure there
> is a consensus around your decisions to use the community property, namely
> maemo.org.
>
> How do you know that those people whose software maemo.org hosts even will
> allow you do host "banners"? I mean, the only reason people come to
> maemo.org is because of the software on their devices. That is based on
> the Linux kernel and the Debian packaging tools and the GNU userland, there
> is very little maemo on maemo.org. What about supporting those projects
> who have supported maemo with their free software? Or is this just a way to
> lay the groundwork for paid ads and pet projects?
>
>
To clarify a few things...

The proposed rules were distributed on talk.maemo.org and the Community
Mailing List. There have been some positive comments and there has been no
objection other than this one person. I agree with Felipe that Council has
limited capacity and we should move on to other more pressing items.

This is not "ads" or "sponsorships" where a banner is placed on the website
in exchange for payment of some kind. That is something different that
would be considered as a separate item, perhaps as part of a budget.

The three banners that have been approved so far (Maemo and MeeGo Coding
Competition 2011; Cordia; and Community SSU) are for projects that are grass
roots efforts by maemo community members. imho we are *supporting* the
membership by permitting their maemo related banners on the website and the
comments are mistaken in suggesting that we are working contrary to members.

Regards,
Rob

On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 11:49, Attila Csipa <maemo@csipa.in.rs> wrote:
>
> To reiterate, this is nothing new, it's just that there was an
> initative to make some more formal guidelines of what kind of
> stuff we want there (and yes, we do get completely bogus requests/spam, which
> we currently dismiss ad-hoc - I don't see how that's better than the
> proposal). That said, wording clarifications and such that make the
> goals/workings of any present or future banners are more than welcome.

The inclusion of the trademark guideline is sensible, but it's
disappointing that the first banner posted *still* violates the Maemo
trademark, and the licence we're granted to use it by Nokia. The
".org" is an important part of the trademark and logo, and the banner
below violates that:

http://talk.maemo.org/maemo/resources/meegocomp.jpg

On a more technical level:

* Can the guideline include a part about appropriate file formats
being used (i.e. JPEG for computer generated art is sub-optimal).

* Can we get some consistency across the Midgard portion of the site?
Certainly when the CSSU stabilises, having that banner on the front
of maemo.org is going to be more important than buried on the Talk
section.

Cheers,

Andrew

--
Andrew Flegg -- mailto:andrew@bleb.org  |  http://www.bleb.org/
_______________________________________________
maemo-community mailing list
maemo-community@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community

On Fri, 29 Apr 2011, 17:38:20 EEST, Andrew Flegg <andrew@bleb.org> wrote:
>    * Can we get some consistency across the Midgard portion of the site?
>        Certainly when the CSSU stabilises, having that banner on the front
>        of maemo.org is going to be more important than buried on the Talk
>        section.

The reality of maemo.org infra is that there are multiple web applications (gforge, midgard, vbulletin, mediawiki, ...) running there, each with their own templating system. But certainly, the banners can be easily included into the Midgard templates when needed.

> Andrew

/Bergie
_______________________________________________
maemo-community mailing list
maemo-community@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community

On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 11:10 AM, Henri Bergius
<henri.bergius@nemein.com> wrote:
> The reality of maemo.org infra is that there are multiple web applications (gforge, midgard, vbulletin, mediawiki, ...)
>running there, each with their own templating system. But certainly, the banners can be easily included into the
>Midgard templates when needed.

We can use something like OpenX[1] to serve the banners using a common
code across all the different templates. Where it is hosted can be a
problem.

Another option is Google DFP[2].

The advantage of an ad server is, you can add new banners and they all
start appearing/rotating throughout the site. Banners can be scheduled
and stats (impressions and clicks) are logged.

These are the ones I've used before but there might be others which are better.

Reggie

[1] http://www.openx.org/
[2] https://www.google.com/intl/en_US/dfp/info/sb/how_it_works.html
_______________________________________________
maemo-community mailing list
maemo-community@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community

Maybe I'm just thick in the head, Jeremiah... but I don't quite get your
position. Seems like an overreaction to what's proposed.

No one is talking about commerce here. For now it's community contests
and the like. I'd agree if the discussion was about becoming a web
store, but we're just formalizing a very basic banner program.

But rather than just argue I'd like to know how you would approach
something like the MeeGo coding contest. Are you against ANY sort of
maemo.org advertising for it, or just banners? Or do you disagree with
the contest itself?

Randy
(sorry for the top-posting-- I can only get Ovi to work on my MeeGo
netbook now and in-line replies are a pain.

On Fri, 2011-04-29 at 12:10 +0200, Jeremiah Foster wrote:

> This is a very, very misguided decision and ought to be entered into only with consensus from the wider Maemo community.
>
> Look at any Open Source project's web site, i.e. MeeGo, Fedora, Debian, you won't see any banners.
>
> I'll answer your replies inline below.
>
> On Apr 28, 2011, at 14:43, Sunny B wrote:
>
> > Well, Jeremiah had the only negative comments. I don't know what Maghreb is, but military dictatorship is a bit of hyperbole. Since banners weren't even invited before, and now they are (subject to some rules), the criticism seems misplaced. In any event, I've tried to utilize the constructive parts and revised the rules to be as below. They are intended to prevent the website from being overrun with ads for fart apps and such.
> > • Banner should be for a project with a clear and compelling purpose.
> > • The purpose of project should be related to Maemo or a maemo device.
> > • The project should maintain an online presence at maemo.org or own web site.
> > • The project should be generally open source or open governance.
> > • The banner should not violate any trademark or copyright.
> > • The project agrees that posting a banner to support a project does not make maemo.org a sponsor or otherwise responsible for the project.
> > • A maemo.org member in good standing must be designated as primary contact.
> > • The project agrees to answer queries from Council regarding project.
> > • All requests for banners (and objections) shall be directed to Council who shall determine whether the banner satisfies these rules and the length of time the banner will be posted.
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 5:00 PM, Jeremiah C. Foster <jeremiah@jeremiahfoster.com> wrote:
> > On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 03:17:49PM -0400, Sunny B wrote:
> > > Council has decided to allow a limited number banners on maemo.org for
> > > related projects. There is already a banner for the 2011 Coding
> > > Competition. A banner has been prepared for the Cordia project. And
> > > council has approved the Community SSU for a third banner, although a banner
> > > has not yet been submitted for review. The following set of rules are
> > > proposed to serve as guidance for those who might consider submitting a
> > > banner to maemo.org in the future. Constructive comments on the rules are
> > > requested.
> > >
> > > - Banner must be for a project with a clear and compelling purpose.
> >
> > How are you defining "compelling"? This seems like it will be easily misunderstood.
> >
> > We are not defining "compelling". We'll leave that to the dictionary.
>
> So you are going to be intentionally vague about what can go on the site?
> >
> > > - The purpose of project must be related to Maemo or a maemo device.
> > > - The project must maintain an online presence at maemo.org or own web
> > > site.
> > > - The project must be generally open source or open governance.
> >
> > "Generally"? Don't you mean "specifically"? What are you trying to avoid,
> > banning an app that requires paid support?
> >
> > No. Even Maemo itself is not completely and specifically open source.
>
> Wrong. This is an open source project and even the Maemo council does not have a clear mandate to litter the web page with ads. If this happens, there will be a fork of the project and there is nothing you can do to stop it, it is allowable through the software licenses of the project.
> >
> > > - The banner must not violate any trademark or copyright.
> >
> > You'll never be able to know for sure. You can only check if it has appropriate
> > copyright attribution and assume it is correct. (Plausible deniability is what
> > Maemo needs if there copyright claims against something you thought was okay.)
> >
> > Granted, you'll not know for sure. But this is to make explicit the policy on such matters.
> >
> > > - The project agrees that maemo.org incurs no responsibility by posting
> > > banner.
> >
> > How on earth are you going to absolve yourselves of responsibility for
> > posting the banner? In some European countries its been proposed that bloggers
> > register with the government. What makes you think that the council or those
> > in charge of maemo.org won't be responsible for what they post on their web site?
> >
> > Rules are amended to clarify that posting a banner does not imply responsibility for the project.
>
> This is not a legal strategy. You may open up maemo.org to legal action if you fail to determine provenance or accuracy of the content of the ads.
> >
> > > - A maemo.org member in good standing must be designated as primary
> > > contact.
> > > - The project agrees to answer queries from Council regarding project.
> > > - Banner may be removed at any time and for any reason by Council.
> >
> > So the council can remove anything they want, without supplying a reason,
> > but bears no responsibility?
> >
> > The rules don't say a reason doesn't have to be supplied. And yes Council is responsible for banner decisions. The webmasters don't want to be (and shouldn't be) in the position of deciding which banners get posted and for how long.
> >
> > Really?
> >
> > This sounds like military dictatorship in the Maghreb.
> >
> > Lighten up.
>
> Nope. It is you who need to take this much more seriously. Advertising on the maemo website will put the final nail in the coffin of Maemo and you'll bear the responsibility.
>
> Regards,
>
> Jeremiah
> _______________________________________________
> maemo-community mailing list
> maemo-community@maemo.org
> https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community

Reggie,

I've taken a quick look at both options. Each one has a lot of functionality
that we would not be interested in. I think we want to pick the solution
that is easiest and cheapest to implement and to maintain.

Rob


On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 11:29 AM, Reggie Suplido <
reggie@internettablettalk.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 11:10 AM, Henri Bergius
> <henri.bergius@nemein.com> wrote:
> > The reality of maemo.org infra is that there are multiple web
> applications (gforge, midgard, vbulletin, mediawiki, ...)
> >running there, each with their own templating system. But certainly, the
> banners can be easily included into the
> >Midgard templates when needed.
>
> We can use something like OpenX[1] to serve the banners using a common
> code across all the different templates. Where it is hosted can be a
> problem.
>
> Another option is Google DFP[2].
>
> The advantage of an ad server is, you can add new banners and they all
> start appearing/rotating throughout the site. Banners can be scheduled
> and stats (impressions and clicks) are logged.
>
> These are the ones I've used before but there might be others which are
> better.
>
> Reggie
>
> [1] http://www.openx.org/
> [2] https://www.google.com/intl/en_US/dfp/info/sb/how_it_works.html
> _______________________________________________
> maemo-community mailing list
> maemo-community@maemo.org
> https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community
>

On May 1, 2011, at 13:47, Randall Arnold wrote:

> Maybe I'm just thick in the head, Jeremiah... but I don't quite get your position. Seems like an overreaction to what's proposed.
>
> No one is talking about commerce here. For now it's community contests and the like. I'd agree if the discussion was about becoming a web store, but we're just formalizing a very basic banner program.
>
> But rather than just argue I'd like to know how you would approach something like the MeeGo coding contest. Are you against ANY sort of maemo.org advertising for it, or just banners? Or do you disagree with the contest itself?

To be clear - I'm all for a Maemo coding contest. I am totally against advertising on the Maemo site.

And lets be honest, we are talking about commerce here. The banner is a style explicitly associated with advertising. Even if the current banners are not being monetized it is a short step to that happening. If Maemo were something original, if it weren't built on Debian and Debian's social contract as well as the Debian tools and Free Software, I'd say "go ahead, do as you please." But Maemo isn't original, it is almost wholly derivative. Taking someone else's software and putting banners all over it is a questionable practice in my mind.

If the current council wants Maemo to become a commercial entity it needs to make sure it communicates that in no uncertain terms. It also needs to return changes back from Maemo to Debian to be in compliance with the GPL. There is a project for this called "DEX" and I strongly advise the council and all members of Maemo to look into it and participate. This project was created explicitly for Debian derivatives like Maemo. Canonical's CTO is actively moving patches from Ubuntu back to Debian through DEX. Maemo should do this too.

I think the council needs to be more transparent about its intentions, statements like "even Maemo itself is not completely and specifically open source" are wrong and misleading. This is what leads many to believe that the banners are a step on the road to ads on the maemo.org site.

Regards,

Jeremiah


>
> Randy
> (sorry for the top-posting-- I can only get Ovi to work on my MeeGo netbook now and in-line replies are a pain.
>
> On Fri, 2011-04-29 at 12:10 +0200, Jeremiah Foster wrote:
>> This is a very, very misguided decision and ought to be entered into only with consensus from the wider Maemo community.
>>
>> Look at any Open Source project's web site, i.e. MeeGo, Fedora, Debian, you won't see any banners.
>>
>> I'll answer your replies inline below.
>>
>> On Apr 28, 2011, at 14:43, Sunny B wrote:
>>
>> > Well, Jeremiah had the only negative comments. I don't know what Maghreb is, but military dictatorship is a bit of hyperbole. Since banners weren't even invited before, and now they are (subject to some rules), the criticism seems misplaced. In any event, I've tried to utilize the constructive parts and revised the rules to be as below. They are intended to prevent the website from being overrun with ads for fart apps and such.
>> > • Banner should be for a project with a clear and compelling purpose.
>> > • The purpose of project should be related to Maemo or a maemo device.
>> > • The project should maintain an online presence at maemo.org or own web site.
>> > • The project should be generally open source or open governance.
>> > • The banner should not violate any trademark or copyright.
>> > • The project agrees that posting a banner to support a project does not make maemo.org a sponsor or otherwise responsible for the project.
>> > • A maemo.org member in good standing must be designated as primary contact.
>> > • The project agrees to answer queries from Council regarding project.
>> > • All requests for banners (and objections) shall be directed to Council who shall determine whether the banner satisfies these rules and the length of time the banner will be posted.
>> >
>> >
>> > On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 5:00 PM, Jeremiah C. Foster <
>> jeremiah@jeremiahfoster.com
>> > wrote:
>> > On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 03:17:49PM -0400, Sunny B wrote:
>> > > Council has decided to allow a limited number banners on maemo.org for
>> > > related projects. There is already a banner for the 2011 Coding
>> > > Competition. A banner has been prepared for the Cordia project. And
>> > > council has approved the Community SSU for a third banner, although a banner
>> > > has not yet been submitted for review. The following set of rules are
>> > > proposed to serve as guidance for those who might consider submitting a
>> > > banner to maemo.org in the future. Constructive comments on the rules are
>> > > requested.
>> > >
>> > > - Banner must be for a project with a clear and compelling purpose.
>> >
>> > How are you defining "compelling"? This seems like it will be easily misunderstood.
>> >
>> > We are not defining "compelling". We'll leave that to the dictionary.
>>
>> So you are going to be intentionally vague about what can go on the site?
>> >
>> > > - The purpose of project must be related to Maemo or a maemo device.
>> > > - The project must maintain an online presence at maemo.org or own web
>> > > site.
>> > > - The project must be generally open source or open governance.
>> >
>> > "Generally"? Don't you mean "specifically"? What are you trying to avoid,
>> > banning an app that requires paid support?
>> >
>> > No. Even Maemo itself is not completely and specifically open source.
>>
>> Wrong. This is an open source project and even the Maemo council does not have a clear mandate to litter the web page with ads. If this happens, there will be a fork of the project and there is nothing you can do to stop it, it is allowable through the software licenses of the project.
>> >
>> > > - The banner must not violate any trademark or copyright.
>> >
>> > You'll never be able to know for sure. You can only check if it has appropriate
>> > copyright attribution and assume it is correct. (Plausible deniability is what
>> > Maemo needs if there copyright claims against something you thought was okay.)
>> >
>> > Granted, you'll not know for sure. But this is to make explicit the policy on such matters.
>> >
>> > > - The project agrees that maemo.org incurs no responsibility by posting
>> > > banner.
>> >
>> > How on earth are you going to absolve yourselves of responsibility for
>> > posting the banner? In some European countries its been proposed that bloggers
>> > register with the government. What makes you think that the council or those
>> > in charge of maemo.org won't be responsible for what they post on their web site?
>> >
>> > Rules are amended to clarify that posting a banner does not imply responsibility for the project.
>>
>> This is not a legal strategy. You may open up maemo.org to legal action if you fail to determine provenance or accuracy of the content of the ads.
>> >
>> > > - A maemo.org member in good standing must be designated as primary
>> > > contact.
>> > > - The project agrees to answer queries from Council regarding project.
>> > > - Banner may be removed at any time and for any reason by Council.
>> >
>> > So the council can remove anything they want, without supplying a reason,
>> > but bears no responsibility?
>> >
>> > The rules don't say a reason doesn't have to be supplied. And yes Council is responsible for banner decisions. The webmasters don't want to be (and shouldn't be) in the position of deciding which banners get posted and for how long.
>> >
>> > Really?
>> >
>> > This sounds like military dictatorship in the Maghreb.
>> >
>> > Lighten up.
>>
>> Nope. It is you who need to take this much more seriously. Advertising on the maemo website will put the final nail in the coffin of Maemo and you'll bear the responsibility.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Jeremiah
>> _______________________________________________
>> maemo-community mailing list
>>
>> maemo-community@maemo.org
>> https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community
>
> _______________________________________________
> maemo-community mailing list
> maemo-community@maemo.org
> https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community

_______________________________________________
maemo-community mailing list
maemo-community@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community

On Mon, 2011-05-16 at 14:20 +0200, Jeremiah Foster wrote:
> I think the council needs to be more transparent about its intentions,
> statements like "even Maemo itself is not completely and specifically
> open source" are wrong and misleading. This is what leads many to
> believe that the banners are a step on the road to ads on the
> maemo.org site.

I'd love to see actual proof for those "many"...

andre
--
Andre Klapper (maemo.org bugmaster)
http://www.openismus.com

_______________________________________________
maemo-community mailing list
maemo-community@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community

On May 16, 2011, at 14:37, Andre Klapper wrote:

> On Mon, 2011-05-16 at 14:20 +0200, Jeremiah Foster wrote:
>> I think the council needs to be more transparent about its intentions,
>> statements like "even Maemo itself is not completely and specifically
>> open source" are wrong and misleading. This is what leads many to
>> believe that the banners are a step on the road to ads on the
>> maemo.org site.
>
> I'd love to see actual proof for those "many"...

You're not saying anything Andre. The point is that until the council comes out and explicitly states one way or the other, there is room for speculation. You can snipe all you want, that won't change anything.

Jeremiah
_______________________________________________
maemo-community mailing list
maemo-community@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community

Jeremiah Foster wrote:
> On May 16, 2011, at 14:37, Andre Klapper wrote:
>> I'd love to see actual proof for those "many"...
>
> You're not saying anything Andre. The point is that until the council comes out and explicitly states one way or the other, there is room for speculation. You can snipe all you want, that won't change anything.

Please stop bickering, boys.

Dave.

--
Email: dneary@maemo.org
Jabber: bolsh@jabber.org

_______________________________________________
maemo-community mailing list
maemo-community@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community

We'll have to agree to strongly disagree on the topic, Jeremiah (with the exception of DEX).  And the council has been fully transparent; communications have been forthcoming and and any oversights quickly addressed.
 
Randy
(sorry for top-posting.  Frigging Ovi)


________________________________
From: Jeremiah Foster <jeremiah@jeremiahfoster.com>
To: List for community development <maemo-community@maemo.org>
Sent: Monday, May 16, 2011 7:20 AM
Subject: Re: Banners on maemo.org


On May 1, 2011, at 13:47, Randall Arnold wrote:

> Maybe I'm just thick in the head, Jeremiah... but I don't quite get your position.  Seems like an overreaction to what's proposed.
>
> No one is talking about commerce here.  For now it's community contests and the like.  I'd agree if the discussion was about becoming a web store, but we're just formalizing a very basic banner program.
>
> But rather than just argue I'd like to know how you would approach something like the MeeGo coding contest.  Are you against ANY sort of maemo.org advertising for it, or just banners?  Or do you disagree with the contest itself?

To be clear - I'm all for a Maemo coding contest. I am totally against advertising on the Maemo site.

And lets be honest, we are talking about commerce here. The banner is a style explicitly associated with advertising. Even if the current banners are not being monetized it is a short step to that happening.  If Maemo were something original, if it weren't built on Debian and Debian's social contract as well as the Debian tools and Free Software, I'd say "go ahead, do as you please." But Maemo isn't original, it is almost wholly derivative. Taking someone else's software and putting banners all over it is a questionable practice in my mind.

If the current council wants Maemo to become a commercial entity it needs to make sure it communicates that in no uncertain terms. It also needs to return changes back from Maemo to Debian to be in compliance with the GPL. There is a project for this called "DEX" and I strongly advise the council and all members of Maemo to look into it and participate. This project was created explicitly for Debian derivatives like Maemo. Canonical's CTO is actively moving patches from Ubuntu back to Debian through DEX. Maemo should do this too.

I think the council needs to be more transparent about its intentions, statements like "even Maemo itself is not completely and specifically open source" are wrong and misleading. This is what leads many to believe that the banners are a step on the road to ads on the maemo.org site.

Regards,

Jeremiah

So what are you saying? You intend to go forward with banner advertising?

On May 16, 2011, at 15:08, Randall Arnold wrote:

> We'll have to agree to strongly disagree on the topic, Jeremiah (with the exception of DEX). And the council has been fully transparent; communications have been forthcoming and and any oversights quickly addressed.
>
> Randy
> (sorry for top-posting. Frigging Ovi)
>
> From: Jeremiah Foster <jeremiah@jeremiahfoster.com>
> To: List for community development <maemo-community@maemo.org>
> Sent: Monday, May 16, 2011 7:20 AM
> Subject: Re: Banners on maemo.org
>
>
> On May 1, 2011, at 13:47, Randall Arnold wrote:
>
> > Maybe I'm just thick in the head, Jeremiah... but I don't quite get your position. Seems like an overreaction to what's proposed.
> >
> > No one is talking about commerce here. For now it's community contests and the like. I'd agree if the discussion was about becoming a web store, but we're just formalizing a very basic banner program.
> >
> > But rather than just argue I'd like to know how you would approach something like the MeeGo coding contest. Are you against ANY sort of maemo.org advertising for it, or just banners? Or do you disagree with the contest itself?
>
> To be clear - I'm all for a Maemo coding contest. I am totally against advertising on the Maemo site.
>
> And lets be honest, we are talking about commerce here. The banner is a style explicitly associated with advertising. Even if the current banners are not being monetized it is a short step to that happening. If Maemo were something original, if it weren't built on Debian and Debian's social contract as well as the Debian tools and Free Software, I'd say "go ahead, do as you please." But Maemo isn't original, it is almost wholly derivative. Taking someone else's software and putting banners all over it is a questionable practice in my mind.
>
> If the current council wants Maemo to become a commercial entity it needs to make sure it communicates that in no uncertain terms. It also needs to return changes back from Maemo to Debian to be in compliance with the GPL. There is a project for this called "DEX" and I strongly advise the council and all members of Maemo to look into it and participate. This project was created explicitly for Debian derivatives like Maemo. Canonical's CTO is actively moving patches from Ubuntu back to Debian through DEX. Maemo should do this too.
>
> I think the council needs to be more transparent about its intentions, statements like "even Maemo itself is not completely and specifically open source" are wrong and misleading. This is what leads many to believe that the banners are a step on the road to ads on the maemo.org site.
>
> Regards,
>
> Jeremiah
> _______________________________________________
> maemo-community mailing list
> maemo-community@maemo.org
> https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community

_______________________________________________
maemo-community mailing list
maemo-community@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community

Can you be explicit? What part do you disagree with? That Maemo is not largely Debian?

On May 16, 2011, at 15:08, Randall Arnold wrote:

> We'll have to agree to strongly disagree on the topic, Jeremiah (with the exception of DEX). And the council has been fully transparent; communications have been forthcoming and and any oversights quickly addressed.
>
> Randy
> (sorry for top-posting. Frigging Ovi)
>
> From: Jeremiah Foster <jeremiah@jeremiahfoster.com>
> To: List for community development <maemo-community@maemo.org>
> Sent: Monday, May 16, 2011 7:20 AM
> Subject: Re: Banners on maemo.org
>
>
> On May 1, 2011, at 13:47, Randall Arnold wrote:
>
> > Maybe I'm just thick in the head, Jeremiah... but I don't quite get your position. Seems like an overreaction to what's proposed.
> >
> > No one is talking about commerce here. For now it's community contests and the like. I'd agree if the discussion was about becoming a web store, but we're just formalizing a very basic banner program.
> >
> > But rather than just argue I'd like to know how you would approach something like the MeeGo coding contest. Are you against ANY sort of maemo.org advertising for it, or just banners? Or do you disagree with the contest itself?
>
> To be clear - I'm all for a Maemo coding contest. I am totally against advertising on the Maemo site.
>
> And lets be honest, we are talking about commerce here. The banner is a style explicitly associated with advertising. Even if the current banners are not being monetized it is a short step to that happening. If Maemo were something original, if it weren't built on Debian and Debian's social contract as well as the Debian tools and Free Software, I'd say "go ahead, do as you please." But Maemo isn't original, it is almost wholly derivative. Taking someone else's software and putting banners all over it is a questionable practice in my mind.
>
> If the current council wants Maemo to become a commercial entity it needs to make sure it communicates that in no uncertain terms. It also needs to return changes back from Maemo to Debian to be in compliance with the GPL. There is a project for this called "DEX" and I strongly advise the council and all members of Maemo to look into it and participate. This project was created explicitly for Debian derivatives like Maemo. Canonical's CTO is actively moving patches from Ubuntu back to Debian through DEX. Maemo should do this too.
>
> I think the council needs to be more transparent about its intentions, statements like "even Maemo itself is not completely and specifically open source" are wrong and misleading. This is what leads many to believe that the banners are a step on the road to ads on the maemo.org site.
>
> Regards,
>
> Jeremiah
> _______________________________________________
> maemo-community mailing list
> maemo-community@maemo.org
> https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community

_______________________________________________
maemo-community mailing list
maemo-community@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community

Are you asking me personally or the council?  Personally I don't have the qualms you do against advertising in toto.  I think the only problems with advertising come from policy, not the practice itself.

As for the council, why would you leap to that question from the communications thus far?  Especially my comments below?  That's a stretch.  The answer is I don't know.  I have seen nothing establishing that, and it would be discussed publicly anyway.
 
Randy


________________________________
From: Jeremiah Foster <jeremiah@jeremiahfoster.com>
To: Randall Arnold <texrat@ovi.com>; List for community development <maemo-community@maemo.org>
Sent: Monday, May 16, 2011 8:16 AM
Subject: Re: Banners on maemo.org

So what are you saying? You intend to go forward with banner advertising?

On May 16, 2011, at 15:08, Randall Arnold wrote:

> We'll have to agree to strongly disagree on the topic, Jeremiah (with the exception of DEX).  And the council has been fully transparent; communications have been forthcoming and and any oversights quickly addressed.
> 
> Randy
> (sorry for top-posting.  Frigging Ovi)
>
> From: Jeremiah Foster <jeremiah@jeremiahfoster.com>
> To: List for community development <maemo-community@maemo.org>
> Sent: Monday, May 16, 2011 7:20 AM
> Subject: Re: Banners on maemo.org
>
>
> On May 1, 2011, at 13:47, Randall Arnold wrote:
>
> > Maybe I'm just thick in the head, Jeremiah... but I don't quite get your position.  Seems like an overreaction to what's proposed.
> >
> > No one is talking about commerce here.  For now it's community contests and the like.  I'd agree if the discussion was about becoming a web store, but we're just formalizing a very basic banner program.
> >
> > But rather than just argue I'd like to know how you would approach something like the MeeGo coding contest.  Are you against ANY sort of maemo.org advertising for it, or just banners?  Or do you disagree with the contest itself?
>
> To be clear - I'm all for a Maemo coding contest. I am totally against advertising on the Maemo site.
>
> And lets be honest, we are talking about commerce here. The banner is a style explicitly associated with advertising. Even if the current banners are not being monetized it is a short step to that happening.  If Maemo were something original, if it weren't built on Debian and Debian's social contract as well as the Debian tools and Free Software, I'd say "go ahead, do as you please." But Maemo isn't original, it is almost wholly derivative. Taking someone else's software and putting banners all over it is a questionable practice in my mind.
>
> If the current council wants Maemo to become a commercial entity it needs to make sure it communicates that in no uncertain terms. It also needs to return changes back from Maemo to Debian to be in compliance with the GPL. There is a project for this called "DEX" and I strongly advise the council and all members of Maemo to look into it and participate. This project was created explicitly for Debian derivatives like Maemo. Canonical's CTO is actively moving patches from Ubuntu back to Debian through DEX. Maemo should do this too.
>
> I think the council needs to be more transparent about its intentions, statements like "even Maemo itself is not completely and specifically open source" are wrong and misleading. This is what leads many to believe that the banners are a step on the road to ads on the maemo.org site.
>
> Regards,
>
> Jeremiah
> _______________________________________________
> maemo-community mailing list
> maemo-community@maemo.org
> https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community

I can't speak in the name of the entire council but here we go: THE CURRENT
COUNCIL HAS NOT ANY PLAN OR WISH TO START USING BANNERS AS (PAID)
ADVERTISEMENT.

Everybody in the current council, and most people in the community, are
worried about how to keep maemo viable if Nokia pulls the funding but NOBODY
in the current council has even suggested the possibility of using these
banners as an inroad to introduce paid advertisements. Also, I don't even
think the council would (or should) have the power to decide on this
subject.

Just to set the record straight: This banner idea didn't start in the
council. It actually "happened" before the council had any saying on it.
After we had already the competition banner up there, we thought would be
bad for the community if anybody could just put a banner. We recognized that
there should be a clear criteria to assure it would only used in the
interest of the maemo community (open source, free, ...).

Even more, some of us were actually against the banner idea all together but
after discussing the issue we decided that the council should not try to
interfere with a grassroots initiative.

Rob took the lead and IMHO did I great job. He also invited feedback and
acted on it.

I think we all have spent too much energy on this subject and there are much
more important ones.

Finally, since the competition banner hasn't been adjusted to the maemo.org
usage requirements and it seems that we haven't figure out how to include
the other selected banners, wouldn't be better to just remove it? I think it
has already served the purpose of showcasing the competition and I am afraid
we just don't have the "infrastructure" to manage it.

Felipe

-----Original Message-----
From: maemo-community-bounces@maemo.org
[mailto:maemo-community-bounces@maemo.org] On Behalf Of Jeremiah Foster
Sent: Monday, May 16, 2011 8:41 AM
To: List for community development
Subject: Re: Banners on maemo.org


On May 16, 2011, at 14:37, Andre Klapper wrote:

> On Mon, 2011-05-16 at 14:20 +0200, Jeremiah Foster wrote:
>> I think the council needs to be more transparent about its intentions,
>> statements like "even Maemo itself is not completely and specifically
>> open source" are wrong and misleading. This is what leads many to
>> believe that the banners are a step on the road to ads on the
>> maemo.org site.
>
> I'd love to see actual proof for those "many"...

You're not saying anything Andre. The point is that until the council comes
out and explicitly states one way or the other, there is room for
speculation. You can snipe all you want, that won't change anything.

Jeremiah
_______________________________________________
maemo-community mailing list
maemo-community@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community

_______________________________________________
maemo-community mailing list
maemo-community@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community

Doesn't sound very "transparent" to me. You point to "problems" with advertising "policy" and you say you don't know about the council's policies. This is exactly the kind of transparency I'm calling for; a clear position on advertising on maemo.org.

Can anyone from the Council discuss this position and describe the decision making process used to arrive at the position?

Regards,

Jeremiah

On May 16, 2011, at 15:24, Randall Arnold wrote:

> Are you asking me personally or the council? Personally I don't have the qualms you do against advertising in toto. I think the only problems with advertising come from policy, not the practice itself.
>
> As for the council, why would you leap to that question from the communications thus far? Especially my comments below? That's a stretch. The answer is I don't know. I have seen nothing establishing that, and it would be discussed publicly anyway.
>
> Randy
>
> From: Jeremiah Foster <jeremiah@jeremiahfoster.com>
> To: Randall Arnold <texrat@ovi.com>; List for community development <maemo-community@maemo.org>
> Sent: Monday, May 16, 2011 8:16 AM
> Subject: Re: Banners on maemo.org
>
> So what are you saying? You intend to go forward with banner advertising?
>
> On May 16, 2011, at 15:08, Randall Arnold wrote:
>
> > We'll have to agree to strongly disagree on the topic, Jeremiah (with the exception of DEX). And the council has been fully transparent; communications have been forthcoming and and any oversights quickly addressed.
> >
> > Randy
> > (sorry for top-posting. Frigging Ovi)
> >
> > From: Jeremiah Foster <jeremiah@jeremiahfoster.com>
> > To: List for community development <maemo-community@maemo.org>
> > Sent: Monday, May 16, 2011 7:20 AM
> > Subject: Re: Banners on maemo.org
> >
> >
> > On May 1, 2011, at 13:47, Randall Arnold wrote:
> >
> > > Maybe I'm just thick in the head, Jeremiah... but I don't quite get your position. Seems like an overreaction to what's proposed.
> > >
> > > No one is talking about commerce here. For now it's community contests and the like. I'd agree if the discussion was about becoming a web store, but we're just formalizing a very basic banner program.
> > >
> > > But rather than just argue I'd like to know how you would approach something like the MeeGo coding contest. Are you against ANY sort of maemo.org advertising for it, or just banners? Or do you disagree with the contest itself?
> >
> > To be clear - I'm all for a Maemo coding contest. I am totally against advertising on the Maemo site.
> >
> > And lets be honest, we are talking about commerce here. The banner is a style explicitly associated with advertising. Even if the current banners are not being monetized it is a short step to that happening. If Maemo were something original, if it weren't built on Debian and Debian's social contract as well as the Debian tools and Free Software, I'd say "go ahead, do as you please." But Maemo isn't original, it is almost wholly derivative. Taking someone else's software and putting banners all over it is a questionable practice in my mind.
> >
> > If the current council wants Maemo to become a commercial entity it needs to make sure it communicates that in no uncertain terms. It also needs to return changes back from Maemo to Debian to be in compliance with the GPL. There is a project for this called "DEX" and I strongly advise the council and all members of Maemo to look into it and participate. This project was created explicitly for Debian derivatives like Maemo. Canonical's CTO is actively moving patches from Ubuntu back to Debian through DEX. Maemo should do this too.
> >
> > I think the council needs to be more transparent about its intentions, statements like "even Maemo itself is not completely and specifically open source" are wrong and misleading. This is what leads many to believe that the banners are a step on the road to ads on the maemo.org site.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Jeremiah
> > _______________________________________________
> > maemo-community mailing list
> > maemo-community@maemo.org
> > https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community
>
>
>

_______________________________________________
maemo-community mailing list
maemo-community@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community

Thanks for the clarity on the subject Felipe.

Regards,

Jeremiah

On May 16, 2011, at 15:35, Felipe Crochik wrote:

> I can't speak in the name of the entire council but here we go: THE CURRENT
> COUNCIL HAS NOT ANY PLAN OR WISH TO START USING BANNERS AS (PAID)
> ADVERTISEMENT.
>
> Everybody in the current council, and most people in the community, are
> worried about how to keep maemo viable if Nokia pulls the funding but NOBODY
> in the current council has even suggested the possibility of using these
> banners as an inroad to introduce paid advertisements. Also, I don't even
> think the council would (or should) have the power to decide on this
> subject.
>
> Just to set the record straight: This banner idea didn't start in the
> council. It actually "happened" before the council had any saying on it.
> After we had already the competition banner up there, we thought would be
> bad for the community if anybody could just put a banner. We recognized that
> there should be a clear criteria to assure it would only used in the
> interest of the maemo community (open source, free, ...).
>
> Even more, some of us were actually against the banner idea all together but
> after discussing the issue we decided that the council should not try to
> interfere with a grassroots initiative.
>
> Rob took the lead and IMHO did I great job. He also invited feedback and
> acted on it.
>
> I think we all have spent too much energy on this subject and there are much
> more important ones.
>
> Finally, since the competition banner hasn't been adjusted to the maemo.org
> usage requirements and it seems that we haven't figure out how to include
> the other selected banners, wouldn't be better to just remove it? I think it
> has already served the purpose of showcasing the competition and I am afraid
> we just don't have the "infrastructure" to manage it.
>
> Felipe
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: maemo-community-bounces@maemo.org
> [mailto:maemo-community-bounces@maemo.org] On Behalf Of Jeremiah Foster
> Sent: Monday, May 16, 2011 8:41 AM
> To: List for community development
> Subject: Re: Banners on maemo.org
>
>
> On May 16, 2011, at 14:37, Andre Klapper wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 2011-05-16 at 14:20 +0200, Jeremiah Foster wrote:
>>> I think the council needs to be more transparent about its intentions,
>>> statements like "even Maemo itself is not completely and specifically
>>> open source" are wrong and misleading. This is what leads many to
>>> believe that the banners are a step on the road to ads on the
>>> maemo.org site.
>>
>> I'd love to see actual proof for those "many"...
>
> You're not saying anything Andre. The point is that until the council comes
> out and explicitly states one way or the other, there is room for
> speculation. You can snipe all you want, that won't change anything.
>
> Jeremiah
> _______________________________________________
> maemo-community mailing list
> maemo-community@maemo.org
> https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community
>
> _______________________________________________
> maemo-community mailing list
> maemo-community@maemo.org
> https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community
>

_______________________________________________
maemo-community mailing list
maemo-community@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community

THIS is transparency.  Maintaining the discussion on this PUBLIC list.

When I said "I don't know" it stems from two things: email problems I've had with Ovi (I have not been able to read all list communications) and moreso that I don't know what the outcome will be vis-a-vis advertising.  There has been no final word on THAT policy.  But it will be discussed PUBLICLY.  THAT is the community policy-making mechanism.

I don't understand what more you want.  The protests you raise have no root in anything we have shared.  As for the subject, Felipe explained it very well and I am in full alignment with what he last said from personal and council representative standpoints.

This discussion is spawning too many irrelevant tangents IMO.
 
Randy


________________________________
From: Jeremiah Foster <jeremiah@jeremiahfoster.com>
To: Randall Arnold <texrat@ovi.com>
Cc: List for community development <maemo-community@maemo.org>
Sent: Monday, May 16, 2011 8:37 AM
Subject: Re: Banners on maemo.org

Doesn't sound very "transparent" to me. You point to "problems" with advertising "policy" and you say you don't know about the council's policies. This is exactly the kind of transparency I'm calling for; a clear position on advertising on maemo.org.

Can anyone from the Council discuss this position and describe the decision making process used to arrive at the position?

Regards,

Jeremiah

On Monday 16 May 2011 15:20:39 you wrote:
> It also needs to
> return changes back from Maemo to Debian to be in compliance with the GPL.
> There is a project for this called "DEX" and I strongly advise the council
> and all members of Maemo to look into it and participate. This project was
> created explicitly for Debian derivatives like Maemo. Canonical's CTO is
> actively moving patches from Ubuntu back to Debian through DEX. Maemo
> should do this too.

Just to clarify things - the Council is about maemo.org and the community
built around it. It does not own or distribute Maemo (the OS), which was and
is under the Nokia umbrella - and we definitely want to see as much of Maemo
open and public as possible, even if with arguable outcome on that front. We
also support and respect related distributions like Debian and want to keep
the CSSU completely open and in full compliance with the GPL. It's another
matter that most of these updates make little sense to upstream - they are
mostly Maemo/mobile specific or are upstream to Debian itself. Another problem
is that even with the open parts of Maemo, the maintainers are often Nokians
who have moved on, so we have a bunch of patches/diffs that we will have a hard
time explaining and rationalizing if we submit them to Debian. Don't get me
wrong, personally I really wish to cooperate with Debian as much possible, but
it's no trivial task and we're sadly way too short on manpower, so the only
way I see serious movement there is for people to step up - and I believe they
will have the Council's support for that.



Best regards,
Attila Csipa
_______________________________________________
maemo-community mailing list
maemo-community@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community