julian wrote: > can you list these three attempts here for the benefit of review?
To the best of my ability: 1) Roughly about Warty there was a community effort. The original Launchpad group was created from what I can recall. 2) Around Edgy there was a pretty decent push to get people to organize the works into singular bodies so that they were scannable to outside eyes (Namely Mr. Shuttleworth). IIRC, the original "bombard the wiki and mailinglist" approach (which most are now quite familiar with ;) ) was regarding usplash contributions. 3) Hardy saw some further guidelines and attempts to have people locate their work on the wiki (as has been clearly stated since Dapper -- the Wiki and this mailing list have been the primary focus to prevent further (and it appears unavoidable) fracturing of focus) To this end, I _will_ say that things have gotten better -- albeit extremely slowly. At least now people know that this list is the hitch pin of work in conjunction with the wiki. The wiki itself is used more as well (as is clear by Ken's works). Unfortunately, more people would need to learn or use the scripts that nothlit and others have made available. The reason being that Imagemagick provides pro top shelf tools for collaging and contact sheet type of work. It also handles images of 16bpc etc. > what are your opinions of the Ubuntu Brainstorming Site, and it's > goal to have a voting mechanism? Let me make one thing clear -- I am an _avid_ supporter of Free Software and the processes that surround that. That said, I am also extremely aware that _never_ has Free Software involved unilateral democracy. Voting regarding bugs? Probably a good way to try and get momentum to get them fixed. Will it create a 'The Ubuntu devs must now fix the bug'? No. Voting regarding ideas? Sure! Will it produce 'Now this feature will be created by the devs who are capable'? No. Art and design -- the one thing that Free Software still has leagues to learn about -- is also very much like the 'team democracy' present in Ubuntu. It cannot work under unilateral democracy. Tango is proof in the pudding. Tango is a project that welcomes contributions, maintains an incredible amount of output, and managed to forge ahead. Is it a unilateral democracy? No. Should it be? Heck no! Strictly speaking from professional experience, _every single project_ I have been involved in that has leaned toward the unilateral democracy approach has flailed miserably. Singular vision does _not_, in any way shape or form, lead to success either. The best works I can cite however, across a broad range of disciplines, are all the byproduct thereof, however. Sincerely, TJS
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- ubuntu-art mailing list ubuntu-art@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art
