> > What distinguishes Capitalism from mere Sustainability
> > are the concepts of Capital Accumulation, Incessant
> > Growth, and Labor Exploitation.
>
> Take your political propaganda elsewhere.
Maybe I missed something, but this whole discussion is
political, otherwise, there would be nothi
> > As long as any money made from the ads is plied right back
> > into the Debian Project, and there are clear organizational
> > procedures and guidelines to insure accountability, I don't
> > see a problem with it.
>
> So you agree that it can't be done.
If you're saying that there is no mea
On Mon, Dec 13, 2004 at 05:27:15PM +, Martin Michlmayr - Debian Project
Leader wrote:
> Michael Banck pointed out on IRC that I should explain what google ads
> actually are. The basic idea behind google ads is that you don't
> simply show random ads, but ads which fit in very well with the
>
-Original Message-
From: Joey Hess
To: debian-project@lists.debian.org
Sent: 12/14/04 7:42 PM
Subject: Re: Google ads on debian.org
Stephen Frost wrote:
>> I agree w/ tbm, I don't see the issues as all that problematic. I
find
>> it disappointing, but not exactly suprising, that alot of t
* [ 14-12-04 - 22:24 ] Ludovic Rousseau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Le Tuesday 14 December 2004 à 09:52:43, Manoj Srivastava a écrit:
> >Apart from money, is there any benefit to the free software
> > community?
>
> Maybe you could say to Google we accept their offer only if they relea
also sprach Ludovic Rousseau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004.12.14.2224 +0100]:
> Maybe you could say to Google we accept their offer only if they
> release their indexing and search engine using a free software
> licence (as defined by the DFSG). _that_ would be beneficial to
> the free software communi
* Andrew Suffield ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > Not *entirely* sure what you mean here. As mentioned elsewhere before,
> > SPI might have some use for an accounting service at the very least.
>
> That should be done by SPI, not us.
Well, sure, but it's something intelligent to do w/ a consisten
* Andrew Suffield ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 14, 2004 at 12:28:20PM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > > I would object to Debian itself selling copies of the CD's, or
> > > requiring payment for access to jigdo files or the archive, or a
> > > pay-per-bug option too.
> >
> > Having
* John Hasler ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Stephen Frost writes:
> > Interesting question, I imagine it would have to be SPI on behalf of
> > Debian.
>
> But which specific individual would do the selling? It would involve a
> significant amount of work even if as much as possible was contracted
Le Tuesday 14 December 2004 à 09:52:43, Manoj Srivastava a écrit:
> Apart from money, is there any benefit to the free software
> community?
Maybe you could say to Google we accept their offer only if they release
their indexing and search engine using a free software licence (as
defined by
Art McGee writes:
> What distinguishes Capitalism from mere Sustainability are the concepts
> of Capital Accumulation, Incessant Growth, and Labor Exploitation.
Take your political propaganda elsewhere.
--
John Hasler
* Alexander Schmehl ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> * Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [041214 17:18]:
> > > If no money changes hands, I would see this as a good thing too.
> > Umh, don't we link to the consultants and CD vendors already?
>
> Yes we do. And if we hear, that a CD vendor get's th
On Tue, Dec 14, 2004 at 12:34:07PM -0800, Art McGee wrote:
> As long as any money made from the ads is plied right back
> into the Debian Project, and there are clear organizational
> procedures and guidelines to insure accountability, I don't
> see a problem with it.
So you agree that it can't
* Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [041214 10:31]:
> How much money are we talking about anyway? EUR 100 per month? Something
> like 20kEUR a year? Or more?
Does it make a difference?
The decision should be taken by the answers on two questions:
1. Does it go with our principles?
2. Does i
* Stephen Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [041214 14:32]:
> Funny, do you have examples of where the gloom-and-doom scenario has
> happened to an open source project?
Once there was a GPLed game called "tuxracer". One guy told the
authors, how good their work was, and that they could sell it. The did
* John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-12-14 13:49]:
> > basis, could be "do you want the funds to go to you, or be a
> > donation to SPI?".
>
> If companies want to pay DDs directly for fixing bugs, that's fine.
> However, I don't think Debian should ever disburse money to
> developers for doing
On Tue, Dec 14, 2004 at 12:28:20PM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > I would object to Debian itself selling copies of the CD's, or
> > requiring payment for access to jigdo files or the archive, or a
> > pay-per-bug option too.
>
> Having a
> pay-per-bug is an interesting discussion too provi
> I just want to make it clear. Not-for-profit doesn't mean
> Without-any-money. A non-profit organization can have
> several ways of getting money to raise its projects.
Agreed.
What distinguishes Capitalism from mere Sustainability are
the concepts of Capital Accumulation, Incessant Growth,
On Tue, Dec 14, 2004 at 10:08:23AM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Andrew Suffield ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 14, 2004 at 03:31:47PM +0100, Martin Schulze wrote:
> > > Stephen Frost wrote:
> > > > Do you have any suggestion as to something that'd be a consistent
> > > > revenue sour
* Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [041214 17:18]:
> > If no money changes hands, I would see this as a good thing too.
> Umh, don't we link to the consultants and CD vendors already?
Yes we do. And if we hear, that a CD vendor get's the paiment without
sending the CDs we kann remove him fr
Stephen Frost writes:
> Interesting question, I imagine it would have to be SPI on behalf of
> Debian.
But which specific individual would do the selling? It would involve a
significant amount of work even if as much as possible was contracted out.
> That's an interesting point. I guess what I
On Tue, Dec 14, 2004 at 05:38:52PM +, Martin Michlmayr - Debian Project
Leader wrote:
> * Helen Faulkner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-12-14 16:41]:
> > (OT) Is information about Debian's financial status available
> > publically? Where would I look to be able to form my own opinion as
> > to wh
* MJ Ray ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On 2004-12-14 17:41:55 + Stephen Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >You know, that's funny, I *work* for a non-profit organization.
>
> Meanwhile, all developers on SPI projects are sitting on the beach
> drinking cocktails, rather than any of them doing
* John Hasler ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Stephen Frost writes:
> > I wouldn't have any problem w/ Debian selling Debian CDs
>
> Who would do the selling?
Interesting question, I imagine it would have to be SPI on behalf of
Debian.
> > Having a pay-per-bug is an interesting discussion too provi
MJ Ray writes:
> Meanwhile, all developers on SPI projects are sitting on the beach
> drinking cocktails...
Can't I just stay inside and fix bugs? I hate cocktails, and it's -10C on
the nearest beach.
--
John Hasler
Stephen Frost wrote:
> I agree w/ tbm, I don't see the issues as all that problematic. I find
> it disappointing, but not exactly suprising, that alot of the project
> members disagree outright at the very notion. Not very open-minded, in
> my view. :)
I'm sorry that I've already made up my mind
Stephen Frost wrote:
> > Let me add one more: Some authors of content on the web site may not want
> > to continue to work on a web site that contains ads. (I don't, for example.)
>
> Funny, but you're happy to contribute to a distribution which is
> packaged up and sold on store shelves by for-pr
Stephen Frost writes:
> I wouldn't have any problem w/ Debian selling Debian CDs
Who would do the selling?
> Having a pay-per-bug is an interesting discussion too provided the
> results of the bugfix are made available to all under an appropriate
> license or whatever.
You can have pay-per-bug r
On 2004-12-14 17:41:55 + Stephen Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
You know, that's funny, I *work* for a non-profit organization.
Meanwhile, all developers on SPI projects are sitting on the beach
drinking cocktails, rather than any of them doing any work?
Please, choose your next words
Helen Faulkner wrote:
> (OT) Is information about Debian's financial status available publically?
> Where would I look to be able to form my own opinion as to whether an
> income stream from such ads, or from other sources, is needed?
Please check the spi-general list and the SPI board meeting
* Manoj Srivastava ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 22:48:38 -0500, Stephen Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > This gloom-and-doom prediction is really getting old. No, it
> > wouldn't become a precedent, no, it wouldn't lower our principles,
>
> Yes, it does, in my opinio
* Helen Faulkner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-12-14 16:41]:
> (OT) Is information about Debian's financial status available
> publically? Where would I look to be able to form my own opinion as
> to whether an income stream from such ads, or from other sources, is
> needed?
If you become a member o
* MJ Ray ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On 2004-12-14 14:35:54 + Stephen Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >* Martin Schulze ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> >> . When we are supposed to generate income with the web page it is a
> >>commercial web page.
> >This is, also, wrong. As mentioned
* Manoj Srivastava ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 22:31:57 -0500, Stephen Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > Funny, but you're happy to contribute to a distribution which is
> > packaged up and sold on store shelves by for-profit organizations?
> > Which also include some advert
Stephen Frost writes:
> This is, also, wrong. As mentioned elsewhere, not-for-profit doesn't
> mean no-income.
not-for-profit also does not mean not commercial. It just means that
income is not distributed to anyone.
> I imagine certain (German) universities accept money from their students,
>
also sprach Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004.12.14.1718 +0100]:
> > If no money changes hands, I would see this as a good thing too.
>
> Umh, don't we link to the consultants and CD vendors already?
Ask around. People need solid web presence and more than just one or
two dudes consult
* Manoj Srivastava ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 12:53:46 -0500, Stephen Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > * Martin Schulze ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> >> Honestly, I cannot imagine a reason, why the Debian projects should
> >> turn their web pages into commercial web pages b
* Manoj Srivastava ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 14:22:48 -0500, Stephen Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > Bringing in money, however it is done, does not mean you're
> > for-profit or not-for-profit. Your concern about mirrors is valid
> > and should be pursued and considere
On Mon, Dec 13, 2004 at 02:22:21PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I went to where is counterpunch.org and all I got is advertising for your
> projects.
>
> I need my counterpunch.org
>
> please return the website!
Firstly (and see previous posts), read the websites: Debian has
nothing to do
Floris Bruynooghe wrote:
I'd prefer to make this a polite "no" as well. I don't think debian
should have any adds, let alone some that can't be controlled at all.
Futermore it would create lots of trouble. Just think about the
number of emails of random people we get on -project about totally
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 18:34:58 +0100, martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> > If there are plenty ads of service providers that endorse Debian, I
> > could actually see a benefit...
>
> If no money changes hands, I would see this as a good thing too.
Umh, d
On Mon, Dec 13, 2004 at 05:08:41PM +, Martin Michlmayr - Debian Project
Leader wrote:
> I received the following message from someone at Google:
>
> > Google is interested in advertising on debian.org. I realize your
> > site currently isn't running any advertising, however what we're
> > pr
On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 22:48:38 -0500, Stephen Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> * Alexander Schmehl ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>> * martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [041213 18:14]:
>> > more money is always good.
>>
>> AFAIK Debian has more money, than we can (usefully) spend (at our
>> current
On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 22:31:57 -0500, Stephen Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> * Joey Hess ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>> Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
>> > On Mon, Dec 13, 2004 at 06:35:15PM +0100, Martin Schulze wrote:
>> > > I object. Not by any price we have to pay (and turning
>> > > www.debian.or
On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 14:22:48 -0500, Stephen Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> * Martin Schulze ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>> If you seek to generate income with your website, then it's not a
>> not-for-profit one anymore but a for-profit one and is actually
>> commercial. Several of our sponsors
On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 12:53:46 -0500, Stephen Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> * Martin Schulze ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>> Honestly, I cannot imagine a reason, why the Debian projects should
>> turn their web pages into commercial web pages by adding Google ads
>> to them.
> It's not clear to
On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 18:34:58 +0100, martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> If there are plenty ads of service providers that endorse Debian, I
> could actually see a benefit...
If no money changes hands, I would see this as a good thing too.
manoj
--
You need no longer wor
On 2004-12-14 14:35:54 + Stephen Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
* Martin Schulze ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
. When we are supposed to generate income with the web page it is a
commercial web page.
This is, also, wrong. As mentioned elsewhere, not-for-profit doesn't
mean no-income.
* Andrew Suffield ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 14, 2004 at 03:31:47PM +0100, Martin Schulze wrote:
> > Stephen Frost wrote:
> > > Do you have any suggestion as to something that'd be a consistent
> > > revenue source for Debian that you *wouldn't* be opposed to? Maybe a
> > > Debian Ma
On Tue, Dec 14, 2004 at 03:31:47PM +0100, Martin Schulze wrote:
> Stephen Frost wrote:
> > Do you have any suggestion as to something that'd be a consistent
> > revenue source for Debian that you *wouldn't* be opposed to? Maybe a
> > Debian Magazine (with/without ads?)? Or a subscriber-only Debia
Stephen Frost wrote:
> Do you have any suggestion as to something that'd be a consistent
> revenue source for Debian that you *wouldn't* be opposed to? Maybe a
> Debian Magazine (with/without ads?)? Or a subscriber-only Debian
> website (run by those willing to provide the content for it, obvious
* Martin Schulze ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Please read what I said:
>
> . When we put commercial adverts on our web pages our sponsors may
>have to decline their offer. Take (German) universities for
>example. These would have to be replaced, probably by actually
>renting rackspa
Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Martin Schulze ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > Stephen Frost wrote:
> > > > I startet to use Debian, because it was not commercial, it was entire
> > > > free, and I'm afraid, this will be the first step in the wrong
> > > > direction. It will lower our principles, and it w
On Tue, Dec 14, 2004 at 01:12:51AM +0100, Alexander Schmehl wrote:
> * Stephen Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [041213 18:53]:
>
> > > Maybe the next offer ist to place ads to the head or footer of each
> > > distributed mail on our list server?
> > And maybe we can consider each suggestion on a case-by
* Martin Schulze ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Stephen Frost wrote:
> > I tend to agree that we don't seem to need the money currently, although
> > I do wonder about the possibility of what we might do with a consistent
> > dependable revenue stream (debconf trips for Debian, additional obscure
> >
* Martin Schulze ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Stephen Frost wrote:
> > > I startet to use Debian, because it was not commercial, it was entire
> > > free, and I'm afraid, this will be the first step in the wrong
> > > direction. It will lower our principles, and it will become precedent
> > > case
Em Ter, 2004-12-14 às 00:59, Stephen Frost escreveu:
> I agree w/ tbm, I don't see the issues as all that problematic. I find
> it disappointing, but not exactly suprising, that alot of the project
> members disagree outright at the very notion. Not very open-minded, in
> my view. :)
I agree. In
martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004.12.14.1031 +0100]:
> > Please also note that "the online ad marked decreased" lately,
>
> Can you put numbers to this claim? I am actually hearing the
> opposite.
No, I haven't. This is just what was left in my head fr
also sprach Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004.12.14.1031 +0100]:
> Please also note that "the online ad marked decreased" lately,
Can you put numbers to this claim? I am actually hearing the
opposite.
--
Please do not send copies of list mail to me; I read the list!
.''`. martin f.
Stephen Frost wrote:
> I tend to agree that we don't seem to need the money currently, although
> I do wonder about the possibility of what we might do with a consistent
> dependable revenue stream (debconf trips for Debian, additional obscure
> hardware and professional hosting for it).
How much
also sprach Stephen Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004.12.14.0453 +0100]:
> Sorry, but you're just too funny to think Debian is ahead of the
> game for *anything* except architectures (only because they're
> old) and total 'supported' package count.
You forgot policy and robustness.
And if you think
Stephen Frost wrote:
> > > Yeah, I think this are two important concerns: The legal implications
> > > and the consequences for mirroring the site.
> >
> > Let me add one more: Some authors of content on the web site may not want
> > to continue to work on a web site that contains ads. (I don't, f
Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Alexander Schmehl ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > * martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [041213 18:14]:
> > > more money is always good.
> >
> > AFAIK Debian has more money, than we can (usefully) spend (at our
> > current rate). I think that was pointed out just a feek we
Alexander Schmehl wrote:
> * Stephen Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [041213 18:53]:
>
> > > Maybe the next offer ist to place ads to the head or footer of each
> > > distributed mail on our list server?
> > And maybe we can consider each suggestion on a case-by-case basis and
> > make a decision on a c
On Tuesday 14 December 2004 04:53, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Lars H. Beuse ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > Those Google Ads are look the way they do. cause they're made for a
> > special target group. So that's just quit a good marketing idea (not
> > new). If you want you could say thats also way to
65 matches
Mail list logo
