On 11/11/10 17:28, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Not that I have time to do this, but it occurs to me that setting up
> something fairly similar to Flattr but not involving money would be
> straightforward. I'm imagining a system where someone can sign up for an
> account and is automatically given some s
On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 08:27:01AM +, Philip Hands wrote:
> How about making the planet disarm all links that point elsewhere than
> the same domain as the blog post that contains it? Perhaps a little
> too draconian?
Yes, because there can be genuine reasons for doing so.
E.g., when I want
Cyril Brulebois writes:
> (I guess I didn't have “financial gain” in mind when I added this link
> at the bottom of my posts, rather the opportunity to see whether people
> liked getting status updates about the packages I maintain, or stuff I
> do in general.)
Not that I have time to do this, b
On 2010-11-11, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> at the bottom of my posts, rather the opportunity to see whether
> people liked getting status updates about the packages I maintain, or
> stuff I do in general.)
it is because I like reading what people do in and outside debian that I
read planet.
/Sune
Hi Holger,
Holger Levsen (08/11/2010):
> since a while, we see unsolicted commercial links and images on
> planet, mostly about flattr.
>
> […]
>
> How much spam do you find tolerable? Would it be ok if I sell
> advertisment space on my blog and syndicate this to planet? You
> know, I need to e
Dne, 11. 11. 2010 01:23:51 je Stefano Zacchiroli napisal(a):
general unhappiness (at least as it appears from this list, which is
not
necessarily representative of all developers, users, etc., obviously).
I'll take the above statement as an invitation to add my 2¢. (As merely
a user of Deb
On Thu, 11 Nov 2010 01:23:51 +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> I disagree that this thread is flattr-specific.
/me too.
> It clearly is the most cited example, most likely because is what we all
> have in mind and because Flattr is quite popular these days. Still, I
> don't think anybody is tr
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 05:24:40PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> I don't know on what your summary is based. Looking at the replies, we
> have about 50% persons that wants to filter it and 50% that don't mind
> keeping them.
It was based on my own perception of the general feeling, by re-reading
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 08:20:13PM +0100, Alexander Reichle-Schmehl wrote:
Hi!
* Sune Vuorela [101110 18:19]:
>> I am annoyed by the flattr advertisement and I stayed away from
>> the thread becuase my opinion was already represented, not point
>> in repeating them. If you are going do a 'pol
Ana Guerrero writes:
> I am annoyed by the flattr advertisement and I stayed away from the
> thread becuase my opinion was already represented, not point in
> repeating them. If you are going do a 'poll' based on the people
> participating, add 1 to the list of annoyed people.
+1
--
\ “
Hi!
* Sune Vuorela [101110 18:19]:
> >> I am annoyed by the flattr advertisement and I stayed away from the thread
> >> becuase my opinion was already represented, not point in repeating them.
> >> If you are going do a 'poll' based on the people participating, add
> >> 1 to the list of annoy
On 2010-11-10, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> I'm not particularly happy with the 'flattr this' buttons either. My
> main problem is that I find quite difficult to avoid interpreting them
> as DMUP violations, specifically about DMUP point "don't use Debian
> Facilities for private financial gain".
On 2010-11-10, Julien BLACHE wrote:
> Ana Guerrero wrote:
>
>> I am annoyed by the flattr advertisement and I stayed away from the thread
>> becuase my opinion was already represented, not point in repeating them.
>> If you are going do a 'poll' based on the people participating, add
>> 1 to
Ana Guerrero wrote:
> I am annoyed by the flattr advertisement and I stayed away from the thread
> becuase my opinion was already represented, not point in repeating them.
> If you are going do a 'poll' based on the people participating, add
> 1 to the list of annoyed people.
Same here, plus
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 05:24:40PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, 10 Nov 2010, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> > My next question for you (assuming you accept that a discussion on this
> > list is enough to decide on this matter---I personally do) is whether
> > you find that my summa
Hi,
On Wed, 10 Nov 2010, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> My next question for you (assuming you accept that a discussion on this
> list is enough to decide on this matter---I personally do) is whether
> you find that my summary of this thread, given in my former post, is
> fair or not.
I don't know o
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 04:20:46PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> Are you going to ask DSA to rule this?
No, I won't, because (as already mentioned) I concede it's a gray area
and, more importantly, because I believe in a community based on rough
consensus more than on a community based on judges
* Raphael Hertzog [2010-11-10 16:21]:
> AFAIK the DMUP rules were meant to avoid problems that DSA would have to
> deal with (either legal problems or supplementary useless work). I don't
> think that the presence or the absence of a flattr button/link is going to
> make any difference in terms o
Hi,
On Wed, 10 Nov 2010, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> I'm not particularly happy with the 'flattr this' buttons either. My
> main problem is that I find quite difficult to avoid interpreting them
> as DMUP violations, specifically about DMUP point "don't use Debian
> Facilities for private financia
On Mon, Nov 08, 2010 at 03:18:39PM +0100, Holger Levsen wrote:
> If there is agreement that such content should not be visible on planet, the
> filters wouldn't have to be perfect, instead, the people being filtered would
> make sure that their flattr-invitations are indeed filtered out.
>
> Wha
Raphael Hertzog, 2010-11-09 10:41:40 +0100 :
[...]
> BTW you complain that a flattr image allows flattr to track your
> browsing habits when there are many other stuff tracking you already
> and that are not so "visible", like feedburner.
I also complain about them, but their existence doesn't
On Tue, 09 Nov 2010, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> > For some value of "any". Planet has a big audience, articles are seen by
> > more than 3 persons so it's difficult to speak for them.
>
> How do you get that number?
Feedburner statistics. But I was wrong, it's not that many. That numbers
includes
On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 02:26:25 +0200, Faidon Liambotis
wrote:
> Holger Levsen wrote:
> > since a while, we see unsolicted commercial links and images on planet,
> > mostly
> > about flattr.
...
> On the issue at hand, my personal view is that I am a bit annoyed by the
> flattr “ads” on Planet as
>> > I even encourage users to use flattr to support free software with one
>> > blog post per month. Is this spam according to you?
>> Do it once in a while for whatever other project and there is not much reason
>> to complain.
> I don't understand. I have recommended 5 projects using Flattr ever
Hi,
On Mon, 08 Nov 2010, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> You should be. *IMO* your posts are VERY annoying with the "support my
> work, give me money money money" below them, sometimes very much looking
> to be written just to spread another round of flattr links.
> Might not be the intention, but feels li
Holger Levsen wrote:
since a while, we see unsolicted commercial links and images on planet, mostly
about flattr.
I have a feeling that we're generalizing a specific problem, trying to
draw a line on what's acceptable on Planet and what's not, which IMHO is
impossible get a consensus on.
I
Hi,
On Montag, 8. November 2010, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> No. I would want it to be the same as with other languages - the feed
> owner is responsible to provide a feed that is clean of this.
sounds like a good solution to me.
> I think it depends on the amount of it. A one time "hey, i wrote this
On Mon, Nov 08, 2010 at 09:31:32PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> Somehow you need to take into account how often this happens, whether
> the article provide value for a majority of planet readers, etc. It's
> difficult to set a clear limit.
To me that's the real test. If it looks like there are a
> Can you be more precise? Since I use flattr I wonder if I'm concerned.
You should be. *IMO* your posts are VERY annoying with the "support my
work, give me money money money" below them, sometimes very much looking
to be written just to spread another round of flattr links.
Might not be the int
On 12293 March 1977, Holger Levsen wrote:
> I think we as a project should not tolerate such, agree so, and provide
> simple
> filter mechanisms, so that people can continue to have these links in _their_
> blog posts, while they are filtered out on http://planet.debian.org
No. I would want it
Raphael Hertzog writes:
> On Mon, 08 Nov 2010, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> Where I personally draw the line is that I'm fairly comfortable with
>> Debian-involved people advertising their own services on Planet Debian:
>> their own companies, their own consulting services, their own posts,
>> and so f
Hi,
On Mon, 08 Nov 2010, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Where I personally draw the line is that I'm fairly comfortable with
> Debian-involved people advertising their own services on Planet Debian:
> their own companies, their own consulting services, their own posts, and
> so forth. I would start gettin
Hi,
On Mon, 08 Nov 2010, Holger Levsen wrote:
> since a while, we see unsolicted commercial links and images on planet,
> mostly
> about flattr.
This definition does not make it clear what you're targeting.
Can you be more precise? Since I use flattr I wonder if I'm concerned.
I even encourag
Holger Levsen writes:
> How much spam do you find tolerable? Would it be ok if I sell
> advertisment space on my blog and syndicate this to planet? You know, I
> need to eat too...
Where I personally draw the line is that I'm fairly comfortable with
Debian-involved people advertising their own s
Hi,
since a while, we see unsolicted commercial links and images on planet, mostly
about flattr.
I think we as a project should not tolerate such, agree so, and provide simple
filter mechanisms, so that people can continue to have these links in _their_
blog posts, while they are filtered out
35 matches
Mail list logo
