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, [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
