Re: Linking to non-free websites from

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,



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]