[maemo-community] Banners on maemo.org

[From: Sunny B]

On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 8:14 AM, Jeremiah Foster <
jeremiah at 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.maemo.org/pipermail/maemo-community/attachments/20110429/3a501096/attachment.htm>