Hi Adam,
On Aug 28, 2005, at 2:34 AM, Adam Moore wrote:
Let me make something clear. Although I do think that INGOTs is a
great product and I support it whole heartedly, I represent OpenOffice
first and sponsors second. Let me give you an example. At the NEA
conference the sponsors were INGOTs and Sub300. I always pitched
OpenOffice first and then INGOTs then Sub300. I feel that we need to
predominantly premote OpenOffice, but also promote our sponsors in
someway too.
Thanks for the clarification, Adam. :-)
As to promoting our sponsors, it's a seemingly delicate point. The
way we have done this is by having things like a sponsors' page for
OOoCon 2005: sponsors are prominently displayed [0]. For other
conferences, where OOo has been hosted in another's booth, the issue
has been played by ear, as it were. In one case, for MacWorld 2002
(or 2003; can't recall now), we were hosted by BSDMall, which
distributes the Mac version in its disks, along with some value-
adds. Our presence essentially gave BSDMall more credibility. In
another case, the 2002 LWE SF, we were both in the Sun and LTSP
booths, the latter being more popular. In this case, the arrangement
really benefited both.
But these individual points do not quite get at what you are
indicating. So, here is a formulation of a fairly standard practice:
When we go to a conference representing OOo we represent OOo. We do
not represent the company that has enabled us to go there, though one
may certainly thank it and ought in fact to acknowledge one's
affiliation. The sponsoring company is in the background. OOo is in
the foreground. Our collateral, etc., may thank the sponsoring
company or companies, and use their logos. But our message, as you
underscore, is OOo independent of any sponsoring company.
How does this work with Sun? Well, every conference there is some
tension about this very thing: should OOo be independent, i.e., not
in a Sun booth? For many conferences, like for the recent OSCON,
Sun's presence there enabled OOo's: wouldn't have been possible
otherwise. It thus benefited OOo and its members--you, and Matthew,
to name but two, who gave solid presentations. But beside the big
icon for Sun, Sun didn't intrude into discussions on OOo and was very
careful to separate SO from OOo.
I would suggest then that we need to further formulate groundrules
for conferences, e.g., how are sponsors to be mentioned, & roughly
how to represent OOo. Along these lines, we need, too, to come up
with new compelling examples of OOo in practice. Gotta show, you
know, how much *better* we are than certain others ;-)
Cheers,
Louis
[0] http://marketing.openoffice.org/ooocon2005/index.html
