Simon Phipps wrote: > I would like to suggest follow-up is directed solely to advocacy- > discuss (I have set reply-to). > > On Jun 26, 2007, at 01:04, Darren.Reed at Sun.COM wrote: > >> And yes, I feel that some kind of prize or reward is essential, >> otherwise >> we don't stand a very good chance of getting the right result unless we >> fluke it and someone already is or someone knows someone who'll do >> it for free. "It" in this case being a professionally designed logo or >> cartoon'd mascot. > > > Does the same apply to the rest of the creative work of the OpenSolaris > community? Had we better start getting a prize fund together in order > to motivate people to work on ZFS, or SMF, or DTrace? > > Or do you just think we've all been so impossibly rude and patronising > to marketing professionals that there is no chance they would ever > participate in our community, even if some company who was paying the > salaries of many of the people in the community already were willing to > also pay them while they participated?
Of course we've been rude. We cut up marketing. We tare down lawyers. We laugh at executives. We attack other communities and ourselves. This is all accepted behavior in the OpenSolaris community. I've even been told privately that this is healthy. It's not. I reject it. Now, for every foolish thing we say, I can find equally foolish things other communities (and companies) have said as well. But what I do find fascinating is that for all the attacks on marketing, the marketing list is generally flame-less. And so is the user group community list. That's one of the reasons I suggested merging those communities. I felt that there was a lot of overlap in those communities in terms of people and in terms of issues, so why not combine forces and expand our voice? Imagine a community where attacks are /not/ acceptable and outside the norm. That's my vision for the Advocacy CG. Jim -- Jim Grisanzio http://blogs.sun.com/jimgris
