> I understood you to be talking about labelling links as non-free even on
> wiki pages and Planet GNOME. Were you only talking about links to
> fundraising pages?
>

In physics, problem solving is seen as a case of starting with the most
simple model of a given system, stating assumptions to account for any
uncertainty in the predictions made. There is a fair amount of evidence to
suggest that it is possible to anticipate pretty much everything you can
think of in the physical world if we are able to access enough relevant
information, that is. Perhaps it was a little premature to make suggestions
with that in mind so I will try to clarify to you what I was actually
talking about.

For us to collectively be able to answer the question of whether GNOME
should be endorsing links to non-free sites, we first need to be able to
answer a couple of relevant questions.

1. In what situations can any published link on GNOME's servers be
representative of the GNOME Foundation (i.e. how are we defining GNOME as a
trademark/brand) such that that link could be perceived as being an
endorsement/advertisement.
2. What is a link to a non-free site (I believe Richard might have gone
some way to covering that already, though there might yet be some debate to
be had, yet)

I saw it necessary for us to establish how we are defining links as well as
to determine "GNOME" is (and isn't). That way, we would be able to figure
out the difference between any kind of link from GNOME's server and GNOME
publishing any kind of link. I did this by using examples so we could
narrow things down and it seems like it is generally agreed that publishing
as GNOME and publishing on GNOME's servers as an individual members of
GNOME are two different things and I agree that this is a reasonable
distinction to make. So no, I was not talking about labelling of blog posts
on planet gnome. The short answer to your question though is also no: I was
not just talking about links to fundraising pages either. To me, it seems
like GNOME endorsement would be a banner of some description on their
servers.

The example that has triggered the discussion is concerns fundraising
pages. So let's explore another example to further the point about where a
banner might be interpreted as an endorsement: If you read the minutes of
the board meetings you will see that the possibility of GNOME using
adwords/adsense banner advertisements to generate revenue is currently
under discussion.[1]

GNOME who only recently successfully raised over $100,000 (in less than a
week) to save its trademark because the "brand" means something to the free
and/or open source community?[2] Are you kidding me? GNOME is in the unique
position of actually being able to lead others by example. GNOME is
influential in the wider community. Should we be comfortable endorsing
non-free sites when given when you consider what the mission of the charity
is?[3] Of course not. That is what I am talking about.

Hope that clarifies,

Magdalen

[1] www.gnome.org/groupon/
[2] https://wiki.gnome.org/FoundationBoard/Minutes
[3] http://www.gnome.org/foundation/
_______________________________________________
foundation-list mailing list
foundation-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list

Reply via email to