PR and all help-related suggestions/offers/proposals

Here you can discuss ReactOS related topics.

Moderator: Moderator Team

Z98
Release Engineer
Posts: 3379
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 8:16 pm
Contact:

Re: PR and all help-related suggestions/offers/proposals

Post by Z98 »

You're stretching Amine's definition of 'equality' well beyond what I would consider reasonable. Amine has demonstrated he's open to listening to people with an open mind, but nowhere has he indicated he would trust everyone's judgment equally and nowhere has the project ever suggested that it would consider each and every idea proposed to it. And Amine has already pointed out, your generalization of his statements are extremely problematic.

You also seem to be having issues properly interpreting my statements. My comment about resurrecting that thread was due to one of the rules of conduct. If the person who had resurrected the thread had instead started a new thread, I wouldn't have cared in the least. There's been sufficient precedence of me hounding people for that particular offense that I presumed there would be no ambiguity. The other two comments were on the level of immaturity displayed by the tone of the participants and had little to do with the topic itself. That may have been more ambiguous, but the general trend of that thread does not engender much faith in any sound decisions being made about mascots or the like as a result of any 'brainstorming' by the community.

Regarding developer initiative, I believe I already stated that there was little to no interest in adopting a motto or mascot at this point. As such, why would they take initiative in something they have no interest in?
Webunny
Posts: 1201
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2012 1:30 pm

Re: PR and all help-related suggestions/offers/proposals

Post by Webunny »

AmineKhaldi wrote:
Webunny wrote:Even Amine said literally that his thoughts are presented less structured there.
That issue is just one of my personal shortcomings. In all the discussion (that you quoted) I explained that I'm speaking on my own behalf, and this point was one of them. On IRC I don't spend time structuring my thoughts, I just spontaneously answer/react based on people's questions/actions/reactions. It's not a problem in IRC at all, it's my problem, so your generalization here is incorrect.
Webunny wrote:But anyway, continuing, since we're being open about it too: "it's because based on our judgment an overwhelming percentage were found wanting" you say. Ok, fair enough. But than this contradicts what Amine says that EVERY member, even if it's just a user/translator/etc. has *equal* standing in his eyes. (Or, you disagree with him on this.) This is why I told him 'but in reality that is never actually true' when he said 'we are all equal'. And you just proved my point. Because, let's face it; if we were TRULY 'all equal', then a decision - certainly without any elaboration, communication, let alone general consent - like: 'we (the devs that roam the fora) decided the suggestions are found wanting and therefore it's a NO ' couldn't be made. Agreed?
I meant that literally, in my eyes, anyone can use any of the provided communication means to raise any point/suggestion he/she likes to. You seem to be taking it out of context to mean that it's inequality if the "devs that roam the fora" decide that a suggestion is found wanting. In fact, you are just as equal as they are, in the sense that you can present this idea/suggestion yourself to not just the devs, but also to the whole community, by posting it in the forums, appropriate mailing list, IRC channels... in all the communication means that ReactOS as a project has.
Even so, it would be logical to assume this is true for most people. I think it rather obvious that in a more fleeting 'live' environment, where people all speak directly what they think at that very moment - and often through eachother, sometimes making it difficult to see who responds to whom - is less suited for a more elaborate, thoughtful posting of ones' thoughts in a structured way. It does not mean it's impossible to do, only that it's less likely to happen (statistically) and therefore in general less suited. Personally, I would think it obvious that a more slow method where you can correct and finetune your thoughts BEFORE you post them, is more suited for having a more thoughtful, elaborate and intricate and well-thought out response than a 'live' chat. But we talked about it on irc as well, and you disagreed there as well, and it seems we can't see eye to eye on that matter. I guess this is a difference of opinion we can't readily seem to compromise on, while what I was saying was, that BOTH methods had its advantages and disadvantages, depending on what exactly you want to accomplish. That wasn't an outlandish statement, as far as I'm concerned.


As for 'equality', let me take the dictionary meaning, less one wants to continue which interpretation is correct and which not endlessly:

1. Having the same quantity, measure, or value as another.
2. Mathematics Being the same or identical to in value.
3.
a. Having the same privileges, status, or rights
b. Being the same for all members of a group


I don't think anyone was doubting whether we all have the same value as a human being on themselves; that is self-evident. Maths are irrelevant in this context, which leaves us 3. Now, clearly, 3a isn't the case at all, as I have demonstrated in my former post. This leaves 3b. But what is 'the same for all members'; that is the question I asked. Because, at least in the context of deciding any worth to any proposal made, the decision of WHAT worth to give it, is certainly not equal. Agreed?

I never said you said one wasn't equal in *presenting* a suggestion on the forum, I merely made the observation people clearly weren't equal in *evaluating* the worth of a suggestion. And let's face it: one can present all one wants, until eternity, it amounts to little if nothing comes of it, because it's deemed worthless. And that is, ultimately, the crux of the matter, isn't it? Because people do not suggest a side-project just to show they CAN say it on the forum, no, they say it because they think it has merit. If devs then deem it has none, and thus the project is stopped in its tracks, it obviously (logically) means that the evaluation of the merit is not done on equal basis.

Now, being equal in some things (like expressing it), but not in others (like evaluating it), means, ultimately, people are not treated equal, because there is some equality for some things, but inequality for others. I mean; that's the direct logical conclusion of it. So ultimately, I was fully correct in my statement that to deem 'all equal' is a pipedream, to some extend. I'm not even saying I disagree with the fact that there is inequality, it just seems to me, that it should be also openly said that people are not equal in matters that are important, like in determining the worth of a side-project. Basically, they can say whatever they want, but if the devs unilateral decide they don't like it, that's it. That sort of equality they have, in as far as one still can call that being equal. Just saying 'all are equal' veils this too much, and I prefer a clear distinction in what is exactly meant. The equality one talks about here, is ultimately: you can say whatever you like, but you don't have any say on the matter itself; correct? Me pointing this out is not me misunderstanding the English language, it's an attempt to get rid of any ambiguity.

I repeat: I'm not saying I can't understand that decision, it's just one has to make it clear that people are not actually treated equal as a whole, but only in one small aspect of it. And logical deduction indicates that people that are treated equally only in some aspects, but not in others, are, in fact, *not* treated equally. Therefore, a broad statement that 'all are equal' is incorrect; that would assume one is already equal if only one aspect is equal.

Z98 wrote:You're stretching Amine's definition of 'equality' well beyond what I would consider reasonable. Amine has demonstrated he's open to listening to people with an open mind, but nowhere has he indicated he would trust everyone's judgment equally and nowhere has the project ever suggested that it would consider each and every idea proposed to it. And Amine has already pointed out, your generalization of his statements are extremely problematic.

You also seem to be having issues properly interpreting my statements. My comment about resurrecting that thread was due to one of the rules of conduct. If the person who had resurrected the thread had instead started a new thread, I wouldn't have cared in the least. There's been sufficient precedence of me hounding people for that particular offense that I presumed there would be no ambiguity. The other two comments were on the level of immaturity displayed by the tone of the participants and had little to do with the topic itself. That may have been more ambiguous, but the general trend of that thread does not engender much faith in any sound decisions being made about mascots or the like as a result of any 'brainstorming' by the community.

Regarding developer initiative, I believe I already stated that there was little to no interest in adopting a motto or mascot at this point. As such, why would they take initiative in something they have no interest in?

See my response above. I think we both agree that Amines' and my definition probably differ, but I disagree that it is beyond reasonable to define 'all are equal' as the dictionary defines it. That is, after all, the standard definition reference. ;-) I also don't doubt Amine is willing to listen to people, but that does not make the statement that 'all are equal' any more correct.

As far as your comments go; I believe you on your word. As far as I saw it, the guy HAD made a new thread, but maybe he was 'replaced' anew (or he made a new one after all)? I mean, I didn't see any preceding posts in that particular thread going back to 2012 or something. And as for your other comments: as you said; rather ambiguous. So it's about point 2 in my former post, then?

Well, what about my suggestion in point two?

I understand and agree with your "why would they take initiative in something they have no interest in?"...the same goes for retweeting and facebooking and also for non-devs, of course. Which was one of my points on my earlier post. But basically, I think it would be interesting for the viewers/readers/posters what you actually think about the subject. Could you actually see a way of getting a mascot-project adopted? If not by the lack of interest by the devs, than by, indeed, ordinary (forum)users? What would be needed to make a chance of any such adoption or consideration?

To be more direct: say, someone is an artist (or finds one) and makes a cute puffin as a ROS-mascot... does that have any chance of actually becoming a mascot, or are there some intrinsic or fundamental objections to having a mascot at this time?

Mind you, I'm not naïve; I share (for the most part) your lack in faith in this particular instance - not that making a light-hearted thread is intrinsically bad -, but I also think it's a bit of the chicken-or-the-egg problem. In your opinion, if people actually want to have a chance of seeing a mascot adopted, how should they proceed? By actually searching for an artist that wants to have a try? To paste examples/images of actual mascots? Or to first ask for an opinion on what sort of thing it should be? (well, they kinda did that, I guess). Clearly you find it lacking. What - apart from the frivolous nature of the debate - do you find the most lacking?
Last edited by Webunny on Sat Dec 07, 2013 2:49 am, edited 9 times in total.
Z98
Release Engineer
Posts: 3379
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 8:16 pm
Contact:

Re: PR and all help-related suggestions/offers/proposals

Post by Z98 »

1. You're not getting a puffin. There's already another software project out there that uses it and I'm not inclined to try to justify us adopting it since there's absolutely no existing connection, however tenuous, to the project.

2. Anyone who makes a proposal has to do the due diligence of checking if there are other groups or projects that might already be using their proposal. Otherwise they're just making work for the team, something that we've made clear we take a very dim view of.

3. Someone is going to have to explain what is the point in having a mascot for the project. "Fun" and "cute" are not valid arguments. Adopting a mascot would have to be of some strategic benefit to the project, not something done on a lark. This is something that the community has singularly failed to do for the majority of "initiatives" it proposes.
PurpleGurl
Posts: 1790
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 5:11 am
Location: USA

Re: PR and all help-related suggestions/offers/proposals

Post by PurpleGurl »

The purpose of memorabilia would be to gather interest in the project and also as a way to help funding. You know, sell pens, mouse pads, mice, coffee mugs, t-shirts, etc. I think one of the devs is already doing that on the sly, and presumably putting any proceeds into the project, but I don't know for sure. So creating a mascot, slogan, branded merchandise, etc., are all to get people interested and gain funding. What we need the most is funding and qualified developers.
ArmyMan007
Posts: 231
Joined: Sat Apr 04, 2009 11:05 am

Re: PR and all help-related suggestions/offers/proposals

Post by ArmyMan007 »

In addition to PurpuleGurl's comment regarding the purpose of the mascot, the purpose of the motto (which I'm trying to promote) is to unite everyone under one banner which reflects the project the most. Uniting these two could / would lead to more enthusiasm within the community. Don't underestimate the power of words and mascots.
ReactOS - Open Your Windows to Freedom
AmineKhaldi
Developer
Posts: 50
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 5:01 pm

Re: PR and all help-related suggestions/offers/proposals

Post by AmineKhaldi »

PurpleGurl wrote:The purpose of memorabilia would be to gather interest in the project and also as a way to help funding. You know, sell pens, mouse pads, mice, coffee mugs, t-shirts, etc.
Please note that we can do that without the need for a mascot, simply because we have a slogan/logo. I'll name just one successful (well, I have many friends over there, so I'm not 120% objective here ;) ) alpha quality OS, that doesn't adopt the mascot idea (there was a discussion over there too) yet they managed to get an excellent help from the community through (for instance) donations/funding: Haiku OS
PurpleGurl wrote:I think one of the devs is already doing that on the sly, and presumably putting any proceeds into the project, but I don't know for sure. So creating a mascot, slogan, branded merchandise, etc., are all to get people interested and gain funding. What we need the most is funding and qualified developers.
That's spot on, and was in fact part of the website revamp that I planned, and we had this huge google document back then, with all the ideas that would make our online presence awesome. One of the ideas is to have online shop(s), and we're almost done working on one (Vic is tasked with taking care of the final retouches) but it's not finished yet.

I agree wholeheartedly that what we need the most is funding and qualified developers, but you probably already know that (considering how many contracts I tried to push through, not to mention the GSoC efforts back then). Let me tell you that I'm working on something that will cheer you up soon, so stay tuned ;)
ArmyMan007 wrote:In addition to PurpuleGurl's comment regarding the purpose of the mascot, the purpose of the motto (which I'm trying to promote) is to unite everyone under one banner which reflects the project the most. Uniting these two could / would lead to more enthusiasm within the community. Don't underestimate the power of words and mascots.
For the sake of completing my previous example of a successful, alpha quality OS, please note that Haiku doesn't have a motto either, yet they have a huge, awesome community.
Webunny
Posts: 1201
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2012 1:30 pm

Re: PR and all help-related suggestions/offers/proposals

Post by Webunny »

Z98 wrote:1. You're not getting a puffin. There's already another software project out there that uses it and I'm not inclined to try to justify us adopting it since there's absolutely no existing connection, however tenuous, to the project.

2. Anyone who makes a proposal has to do the due diligence of checking if there are other groups or projects that might already be using their proposal. Otherwise they're just making work for the team, something that we've made clear we take a very dim view of.

3. Someone is going to have to explain what is the point in having a mascot for the project. "Fun" and "cute" are not valid arguments. Adopting a mascot would have to be of some strategic benefit to the project, not something done on a lark. This is something that the community has singularly failed to do for the majority of "initiatives" it proposes.
Thanks z98, for explaining a bit more elaborately your thoughts on the matter. Concerning your last point: I think PurpleGurl and ArmyMan007 have already answered that. I think one might gain an insight in looking at why so many other projects have one (a mascot and/or a slogan); basically it's because it's an easily recognisable sign (aka recognising it as a 'brand' (even commercial companies do that, aside from open source ones), and secondly it allows to sell stuff like T-shirts and plushies better (especially if they are cute, which was the point of making it cute; it's not for the fun itself, it's just that cute sells better than ugly). It's evident that this is a strategic benefit - at least, potentially. As for your first two points: you are right about that, of course, there can be no doubt about it.
AmineKhaldi wrote: For the sake of completing my previous example of a successful, alpha quality OS, please note that Haiku doesn't have a motto either, yet they have a huge, awesome community.
While that may be true, and a mascot and/or slogan is not an absolute necessity for a project to be successful or have a large community, one could hardly ignore the fact that MOST grand open source projects with large communities DO have a slogan and/or mascot. Clearly it's beneficial in some way, because if it would be detrimental to their success, none would do so. One should, therefore, not see it as something that will without doubt make or break a project on itself (haiku indeed proves that), but rather as something 'extra', as potentially an additional way of generating interest and income. (And thus, of more possibility to gain or pay devs). The risk of having a mascot or slogan, on the other hand is...well, none. So if there is possible gain, and no risk, then the choice seems obvious.

The argument that it's not needed because Haiku didn't need it as well, is like saying an open source or other project doesn't need crowdfunding, because there are examples of projects who got successful without any crowdfunding. While true on itself, this does not mean that crowdfunding (like Kickstarter) is not useful and a huge benefit for open source projects. It isn't *needed* in the sense that it would be impossible to do so without it otherwise, but that does *not* mean it's not beneficial TO do so (regardless of the fact that it might still work out without it, thus). All in all, it seems rather obvious to me that it's better for a project to have funding that way, than none at all, for instance, though I'm sure you have projects that managed to get through without any donations as well, if you searched for them. Does those projects prove that it's better to have no funding, however? No, they don't. If you look at it statistically, I'm quite sure you'd note that the more funding, branding (including mascots/slogans/plushies), involvement/interaction between coders and users, etc. a project has, the more likely it is to be successful and have a large community. Each of these things, you can do without, but the *likelihood* of becoming successful does lessen the more things you drop as not being 'needed'.
Z98
Release Engineer
Posts: 3379
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 8:16 pm
Contact:

Re: PR and all help-related suggestions/offers/proposals

Post by Z98 »

One of the other things the community tends to not do well is performing a realistic cost-benefit analysis of their proposals. To execute on a concept is not a trivial undertaking and a concept is useless unless actually exploited. This means that adopting any sort of mascot would be meaningless unless it was actually employed, but employing it would require coordination, time, and money to pull off well. For many other projects, their mascot IS their logo, whereas the ReactOS project already has a logo, one that's a registered trademark for that matter. Properly exploiting the existing assets is already a time consuming and complicated process and no one's been able to present a decent argument of why increasing number of assets, and therefore increasing the amount of work to execute on all of the concepts, would bring a sufficiently high enough return to justify the diversion of the limited resources the project currently has from other work. Let us be very clear here. Choosing to do something will mean choosing to not do something else. My priority, as that of Aleksey and Amine and Victor, is to do a few things well. If we actually followed up on every proposal made by the community, we'd instead be doing a lot of things poorly.
ArmyMan007
Posts: 231
Joined: Sat Apr 04, 2009 11:05 am

Re: PR and all help-related suggestions/offers/proposals

Post by ArmyMan007 »

Z98 wrote:If we actually followed up on every proposal made by the community, we'd instead be doing a lot of things poorly.
I agree with your statement. And that's EXACTLY why we (i.e the community) should take other issues as OUR burden instead of having these issues to become the development team's burden. Such issues, such as the mascot and the motto, should become community driven projects, because it express the community's will regarding this project.

I think that in general we're kinda missing the point about the concept of the project:
ReactOS® is a free open source operating system
Having said that, the principle of open source is, informally, the ongoing support of the community in many open source projects. Projects, obviously, cannot raise to awareness without a stable community of supports. And this community, ultimately, can support the project in many aspects: if one member is a tech-savvy developer, he would contribute to the project. If one member is a multi-millionaire, he would donate to the project. If one member specializes in PR, he would support the project in that aspect. There are many examples to follow by my statement, but you all get the idea. Since ROS IS community driven, why not let us the freedom to help however we can? I don't feel as if I need approval if I want to write something about the project in my blog, website, or even promoting and working towards the idea of a motto for the project. While the devs are focusing on one thing, the community can focus on other issues. It's that simple and it's been working for quite some time.

I know that the devs are working their asses off so we can enjoy the fruits of their labor. But I think that it is necessary to revise the community's role in the project. If I'm unable to support the project in my own field that I believe could be beneficial to the project, then it's not community driven. If the mascot idea also falls on deaf ears, one might think that there is no will to promote community driven projects. It ultimately comes to one principle: if I can't do it, as a community member, then I cannot partake in supporting the project, by whatever means I want to support it.

If that is truly the case, then you might as well announce ReactOS as a closed-source project. You will be no different then Microsoft.
ReactOS - Open Your Windows to Freedom
Z98
Release Engineer
Posts: 3379
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 8:16 pm
Contact:

Re: PR and all help-related suggestions/offers/proposals

Post by Z98 »

If the community as a whole demonstrated the ability to handle additional, actual responsibilities, the team would have happily doled them out long ago. That we have not is because so far as a whole the community tends to leap before thinking. It does far more damage to the project when a community member proclaims as official an incorrect/invalid statement/position than having extraneous projects go undone due to manpower constraints. Whenever someone misspeaks and misrepresents the project, the team needs to expend time and effort to clean up after the mess.

It has also been the tendency of community members to overstate their own skill level. We have people who have come in who proclaim they are graphic artists or who proclaim they know how to write. When we ask for samples, the general result has been either a very poor showing or dithering over producing an example with excuses like they 'can only write about things they know.' Except that if you're offering to write for ReactOS, you need to be able to write about ReactOS or demonstrate the ability to learn about ReactOS, and the inability to produce a sample of said writing means there's nothing the project needs done that you can do, or that you overstated your ability. The people who do have genuine ability and who demonstrate the discipline to get work done, we would often have picked them up already and incorporated them into the team.

Again, no one has demonstrated what value a mascot would be to the project in the immediate future. I've seen proposals for selling stuffed animals or whatever without any sort of analysis of the costs of setting up production versus expected demand or return on investment. As such, the ability to use it for merchandizing crumbles. In lieu of that, I've seen no strong argument that the project needs a mascot to represent ReactOS when we already have a logo that is fairly widely recognized and associated with the project. Therefore, of what benefit is it to the project to have a mascot? The team and the project does not officially adopt something on a lark or "for the fun of it." Even worse from my perspective, if the team ever reached a point where a mascot would be useful, having one preselected years ago poisons the atmosphere as the old decision may no longer be workable but choosing to disregard it risks offending the people who made the original proposal. Until there is a need, there should be no decision.
AmineKhaldi
Developer
Posts: 50
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 5:01 pm

Re: PR and all help-related suggestions/offers/proposals

Post by AmineKhaldi »

AmineKhaldi wrote:I agree wholeheartedly that what we need the most is funding and qualified developers, but you probably already know that (considering how many contracts I tried to push through, not to mention the GSoC efforts back then). Let me tell you that I'm working on something that will cheer you up soon, so stay tuned ;)
There you go ;)
Webunny
Posts: 1201
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2012 1:30 pm

Re: PR and all help-related suggestions/offers/proposals

Post by Webunny »

AmineKhaldi wrote:
AmineKhaldi wrote:I agree wholeheartedly that what we need the most is funding and qualified developers, but you probably already know that (considering how many contracts I tried to push through, not to mention the GSoC efforts back then). Let me tell you that I'm working on something that will cheer you up soon, so stay tuned ;)
There you go ;)

That's actually quite interesting. I guess one is talking about the 'donation bar' on the site, last year. I was wondering why there isn't one this year as well? As said, it was reasonably successful, after all.

It's a very good idea to show people where their money is spend on, though, so this sort of news is appreciated.
oldman
Posts: 1179
Joined: Sun Dec 20, 2009 1:23 pm

Re: PR and all help-related suggestions/offers/proposals

Post by oldman »

I have just read the latest posts on the dev mailing list and I have noticed this part sentence "have the satisfaction of having been a part of one of the biggest achievements an open source project has ever accomplished." in one of the posts https://www.reactos.org/archives/public ... 16485.html
This would be great to have on the front page as part of an appeal for developers, don't you think!
Please keep the Windows classic 9x/2000 look and feel.
The layman's guides - debugging - bug reporting - compiling - ISO remaster.
They may help you with a problem, so do have a look at them.
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 22 guests