On 2004-12-14 17:34:14 + Stephen Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
* MJ Ray ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
It seems quite correct to me. Not-for-profit is not the same as
non-commercial, as you rightly state. However, the poster is
commenting on
commerciality not not-for-profit status. I can q
On Fri, Dec 17, 2004 at 09:27:03PM +1100, Craig Small wrote:
>
> To perhaps see what Google adwords might produce for the Debian website
> you could look at one of my pages [1]. The ironic thiing is the Debian
> package adzapper seems to nuke them so I cannot see for myself at the
> moment what
To perhaps see what Google adwords might produce for the Debian website
you could look at one of my pages [1]. The ironic thiing is the Debian
package adzapper seems to nuke them so I cannot see for myself at the
moment what it is showing :)
It sounds like making it a commercial site will be a
* Andrew Suffield ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 16, 2004 at 01:26:19PM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > SPI already exists, and already owns Debian's trademarks.
>
> It holds them in trust. That is not the same thing.
Right, that means it holds them but can't do anything unless directed
On Thu, Dec 16, 2004 at 01:26:19PM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Andrew Suffield ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 15, 2004 at 09:33:22PM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > > It's a thought anyway. Those involved with SPI have probably had some
> > > thoughts along these lines before, I im
* Andrew Suffield ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 15, 2004 at 09:33:22PM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > It's a thought anyway. Those involved with SPI have probably had some
> > thoughts along these lines before, I imagine.
>
> You're thinking about founding a corporation. There are ple
On Wed, Dec 15, 2004 at 09:33:22PM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> I don't think we're talking about lottery-winning here. In my head
> we're not talking about money going to developers either, initially. I
> guess my vision is something like:
>
> Develop a dependable revenue stream unless current
On Wed, Dec 15, 2004 at 08:59:55PM -0600, John Hasler wrote:
> Stephen Frost writes:
> > The fact that Debian doesn't 'exist'...
>
> Organizations do not need to be incorporated to have legal existence.
You can't sue it and it can't hold assets. It's just a group of
individuals.
--
.''`. **
Stephen Frost writes:
> The fact that Debian doesn't 'exist'...
Organizations do not need to be incorporated to have legal existence.
--
John Hasler
* Manoj Srivastava ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 11:24:32 -0500, Stephen Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > and Debian is by *far* the controller of SPI.
>
> It is? I would tend to agree that people who are interested in
> debian also are invovled in SPI, but that is as
On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 11:24:32 -0500, Stephen Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> * Manoj Srivastava ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>> I would. Money only from donations keeps us honest -- and keeps us
>> to the core of what we started out to be. Turning us into a
>> business, even a not-for-ptofit busin
* Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [041215 10:06]:
> > The decision should be taken by the answers on two questions:
> >
> > 1. Does it go with our principles?
> > 2. Does it add a benefit for our users?
> 3. Does it add a benefit for our developers / project?
Just a special case of item 2.
On Wed, Dec 15, 2004 at 10:25:01AM +0100, Adrian von Bidder wrote:
> On Tuesday 14 December 2004 15.17, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 14, 2004 at 01:12:51AM +0100, Alexander Schmehl wrote:
>
> > > Or maybe we should just draw a line and say: No ads.
> >
> > That would involve the difficul
Stephen Frost wrote:
* Kim ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Not to sound all wrong - I just think it would be enough simply to
express ones opinion regarding this issue and explain possible
misunderstandings and thats it. The rest of the discussion is something
which maybe should just go on personal
* Kim ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Stephen Frost wrote:
> >Then I guess let me just say "some of us aren't quite done yet." :)
>
> And thats cool, but it seems to me that the discussion has left the
> original area and has become a "one on one" discussion about something
> which really is a matt
Stephen Frost wrote:
* Kim ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
At first it was a good idear to post this question here but since
yesterday nothing much productive has happened.
Without offending anyone it is a bit annoying to watch the same couple
of people going on and on about this issue - leading
* John Hasler ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > SPI *is* a business...
>
> SPI is a corporation. That does not make it a business (just attend a few
> board meettings...)
I've been to a few of them, and am an SPI member... corporation,
business,
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digit
> SPI *is* a business...
SPI is a corporation. That does not make it a business (just attend a few
board meettings...)
--
John Hasler
* Stephen Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [041214 22:22]:
> Erm, we could always remove the google ads from the site if there was a
> problem.
Well... I think my posting had an other point, but I can't remeber
which. Sorry.
Yours sincerely,
Alexander
* Kim ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> At first it was a good idear to post this question here but since
> yesterday nothing much productive has happened.
>
> Without offending anyone it is a bit annoying to watch the same couple
> of people going on and on about this issue - leading to nowhere
> (
Hi all!
At first it was a good idear to post this question here but since
yesterday nothing much productive has happened.
Without offending anyone it is a bit annoying to watch the same couple
of people going on and on about this issue - leading to nowhere
(according to my opinion).
If the
* Manoj Srivastava ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 12:09:40 -0500, Stephen Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > It's amazing what money can buy?
>
> I am aware of the corrupting lure of the love of money, yes ;-)
I'm sure you are, but that's again why I think it's more of a
* Manoj Srivastava ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 12:07:51 -0500, Stephen Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > I don't see it as all that much effort, I guess, but I do see it as
> > something that we really should have *anyway* (the mirror policy,
> > that is). I also don't feel
On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 11:12:19 -0500, Stephen Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> * Manoj Srivastava ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>> On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 16:27:15 -0500, Stephen Frost
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>> > Perhaps not, as I said, I thought it'd be an interesting
>> > discussion, not that we
* Manoj Srivastava ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Right. Money, in the form of donations, is nothing
> new. Money-for-work or money-for-advertizing is. There is a
> difference; the former is generouisly donated by people voluntarily
> because of the good they thing debian is doing; the latte
* Manoj Srivastava ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 16:27:15 -0500, Stephen Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > Perhaps not, as I said, I thought it'd be an interesting discussion,
> > not that we should go out and market it as a new Debian thing to do.
> > I don't mind valid criti
On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 12:07:51 -0500, Stephen Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> I don't see it as all that much effort, I guess, but I do see it as
> something that we really should have *anyway* (the mirror policy,
> that is). I also don't feel that Debian will be corrupted by having
> money avai
On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 12:09:40 -0500, Stephen Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> * 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,
On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 12:41:55 -0500, Stephen Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> * 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 p
On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 16:27:15 -0500, Stephen Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Perhaps not, as I said, I thought it'd be an interesting discussion,
> not that we should go out and market it as a new Debian thing to do.
> I don't mind valid critiques of why something isn't workable, I do
> mind kne
On 2004-12-15 15:14:51 + Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Hmm. How hard is it to introduce bugs that one would
subsequently get paid to "fix"?
Not very hard. It's a situation described in the book "The Dilbert
Principle" by Scott Adams.
Now, when will DDs be issued w
On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 13:49:20 -0600, John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> 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 m
On Tuesday 14 December 2004 15.17, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 14, 2004 at 01:12:51AM +0100, Alexander Schmehl wrote:
> > Or maybe we should just draw a line and say: No ads.
>
> That would involve the difficult problem of defining what is an
> 'ad'. Too hard, no point. Easier to deal wit
Alexander Schmehl wrote:
> * 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?
If we need to pay for bandwidth, hosting and administration because th
> > 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 supris
* [ 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:
> 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
* 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,
* 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
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.
* 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
* Pete van der Spoel ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> * Martin Schulze ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [041213 19:30]:
> >I personally don't see the issues so problematic as you do. But: A lot
> >of (valuable) project members disagree, and, frankly speaking, keeping
> >you (and some other people happy) is much mor
* 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 make people think Google is different,
> they're serious, th
* Florian Weimer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> * Stephen Frost:
> > I disagree. There are ads on postgresql.org and I certainly don't think
> > they make it look like Postgresql is commercial.
>
> I think it's disappointing. If this development continues, the only
> ad-free space on the web will
* 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 weeks ago in
> the "donate for e-Ma
* 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.org
> > > into a commercial page *is* a high price, which could also result in
> > > losing
On 2004-12-13 19:38:18 + Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mon, 13 Dec 2004, MJ Ray wrote:
Google has already plagued debian lists (both public and private)
terribly
with their Orkut and GMail services. At best, they are no
Google did? Really? I could see a lot o
* martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-12-13 18:34]:
> Is there a way for us to get a feel what Google would consider
> relevant? E.g. a page at google.com which would show us some of the
> ads to give us a general feel of how good their selection is?
This is getting a bit off-topic now. I w
* Martin Michlmayr - Debian Project Leader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-12-13
17:08]:
> I received the following message from someone at Google:
[...]
> Normally, I reply to advertising requests on debian.org with a polite
> "no". However, given that google ads are widely considered different
> to n
* 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 weeks ago in
the "donate for e-Mail account" discussion.
I startet to use Debian, because
1 - 100 of 145 matches
Mail list logo
