What I would like to have is something like an >>I love your work button<< when you add somewhere on forum, ask, bz, release notes, .... (everywhere) a name of a community member you can click on the name come to his webpage where you can click a like button or maybe an donate button. It's not like a community member will think I want to have money, it's more like someone (I didn't know) like my work, so I contribute more to LibO.
Am Mi., 8. Juli 2020 um 17:03 Uhr schrieb Kev M <[email protected]>: > What if as part of the $5 (or $2, something accessible) annual co-op > membership with Libreoffice you got access to the support forums? Those who > wanted to spend the time to help support the project to provide free tech > support to others would feel good knowing that the people they were helping > were giving back to Libreoffice by being a co-op member, and those who were > receiving one-off technical support would have to pay for the membership to > get access to the support forum. > > Yes there would still be reddit and other channels, but knowing that using > the forum to provide support might push those altruistic people to only use > the forums to give support, and this could snowball into a larger > membership. > > Just a thought I had rereading what I wrote. There's digital real estate > here that can be monetized in a privacy respecting, non-community killing > way that will also benefit eco-system partners IMO. > > On 08/07/2020 10:44 Kev M <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hopes this works as I've never used a mailing list before.. > > 1) I'm making the assumption, not having this information, that Collabora > Office is cheaper than Microsoft Office and other Office Suite software. > How much cheaper is it? If it's just as functional as competitors but it is > less expensive, and has other advantages, there is a profit-making market > for it: > > 1) a) This is that it is open source, and can be reviewed and audited for > security gaps. In Canada, Europe, Russia, and other countries there is a > significant concern that geopolitics in entering into the realm of > technology. Governments are becoming more concerned about the USA and China > installing monitoring software for political and industrial espionage > reasons. > > Why does Collabora not position itself as a secure/open-source/auditable > solution to security issues. Isn't this the reason the German federal > government chose Nextcloud, and the reason the Italian military chose > Libreoffice? > > 1) b) To that point, Michael you raised points about the UK and French > governments not paying for Libreoffice. This is surprising to me and > shameful IMO. These would be large, relatively sustainable contracts to > pursue, and I would suggest that working more with the FSFE's Public Money > Public Code initiative, and presenting it to them from the perspective of; > you're using things, we're having trouble sustaining it, we're hoping you > will purchase, will be a potentially successful strategy. That or do they > get that Collabora is the premiere developer and TDF isn't developing this > for free? If they've already institutionalized the software it might be > worth tugging at the rug under them a bit and telling them the project may > not be able to continue as a going entity because the contractor they used > is not providing any contributions to the development of the software. But > this leads to my later point about trustmarks. > > 1) c) Does Collabora and/or the TDF not have a dedicated government > relations advocacy employee in Europe/North America/Other market countries? > There are many discussions that occur at the government relations level > that lead to contracts and exposure of opportunities to companies. > > 2) That the TDF is not adequately promoting it's enterprise vendors is a > failure of the TDF's marketing committee and the contractors that they > hired. I have followed LO and AOO for years now and I've noticed that the > TDF marketing committee is unwilling to promote LibreOffice in modern ways. > There seems to be a lack of focus on communities outside the FOSS > environment, which doesn't make sense because it's like setting up a booth > to advertise bibles at a religious convention. Why does Libreoffice focus > on attending FOSS conferences instead of International Government > conferences? The NGOs that use LibreOffice for free would be obliged to let > Libreoffice attend the WEF, Davos, and other places. Is there the potential > that the leadership of the Marketing at TDF is not thinking out of the box, > or too small? > > 3) SaaS model - recognizing that all the costs you just listed to set up > small clients is cost prohibitive and that you would need to get 10,000+ > clients for it to be viable -- I would only suggest that because it's hard > and maybe expensive doesn't preclude the idea that this may be one of the > best options to generate sustainable income. > > 3) a) Personally I was excited at the opportunity to pay for LibreOffice > support via Collabora as an individual. I couldn't, because I needed to > have several employees first to justify it. Instead I donate to TDF, but > apparently this money is holed up in a bureaucratic bunker because of > issues of distribution. There's a couple problems here: 1) It suggests the > TDF needs a regulatory review to streamline it's operations. 2) again, the > TDF isn't being proactive enough - are the people working there the right > people to accomplish the organizations mission, or are we just being polite > because they've been loyal for a long time. In that case we might be > looking at an old boys club situation. > > 3) b) In some non-profits, there is no ability to donate directly, the > foundation is supported by the enterprise companies based on the profit > they make. Could the TDF create a certification body with a Trustmark that > says only these companies are able to provide enterprise support for > Libreoffice. Meaning the TDF does not sanction other vendors slapping on > Libreoffice to their solution and hoping it gets updated to fix bugs by > Collabora and CIB, etc. These certified companies would then pay for the > certification on an ongoing basis to remain in good standing, as well as > donate to the TDF to maintain its operations. This would also have the > effect of keeping TDF staff more accountable to metrics set by a small > group of knowledgeable individuals. (Something would have to be done for > keeping community representation available to unaffiliated citizens such as > myself. Haven't thought that far.) > > 3) c) Just building on this and what others have written; Nextcloud has > issues as well, but again, the LO website needs to do a better job of > featuring vendors. I agree with what was written about displaying > enterprise supported versions on the TDF website with a drop-down or some > other format. As stated in point 3) b) I think instead of a donate button, > saying that Libreoffice is free, but if you'd like to contribute to > development and support, consider signing up for LibreOffice Online, or > paying for a monthly or annual support license. > > 3) d) how are these large companies and governments sitting on advisory > committees of TDF and not providing any funds for its growth? > > 4) Co-operative model - has the TDF considered setting up a model in which > LibreOffice is run as a multi-stakeholder co-operative? This would entail > paying an annual membership fee in order to vote for members of the board > of directors. These non-corporate board members could then reflect member > concerns and issues. People will pay for democracy if its a small amount, > say $5 USD, a year. It creates a democratic institution, increases > engagement, and also provides sustainable income. There are lots of people > looking into the concept of platform co-ops to create sustainable software > that doesn't sell-out. > > 5) Eurocentricity - If you read the document foundation planet - > throughout the year the TDF sometimes features volunteers working in > countries like India, Indonesia, and other low wealth countries where > schools, non-profits, and small businesses are using LibreOffice to provide > betterment to humanity. I get that we're looking for sustainability from > rich enterprise countries, but I think it's possible that this is another > marketing angle - Germany, France, the EU, the UK, Quebec/Canada, and other > countries are starting to fund software to provide licenses to these poor > countries. Can Collabora receive grants from the government aid > organizations to give digital access to poor communities. Can this be > position in a marketing way to rich people in rich countries that want to > (at the end of the day, alleviate the guilt of their inequality) help > others position TDF/Libreoffice as software helping the third world. > Because it is already and it's not being marketed as such. > > 5 a) Does the TDF not have a grant writer to get funding from developed > governments for the work they're already indirectly doing in these > underdeveloped countries? > > Just some thoughts on how Libreoffice could evolve, generate income, and > do things in a way that doesn't start creating "editions", which is a road > to the destruction of the project. I also think someone earlier referenced > that this could be interpreted as being against the TDF bylaws, so those > might need to be changed anyway. > > I would recommend taking maybe 200k of that 1.5 million bucket and hiring > a strategic consultant (not one from McKinsey, or Deloitte, or any of those > profit maximizing consultancies) to look hard at the TDF's current > management structure and operations, and provide recommendations on > business model solutions. It sounds like there are structural issues and > there hasn't been action on evolving the organization to look at new > markets for things that Libreoffice is already really good at: namely - > Privacy, Government costs, Public Money/Public Code, NGO/Emerging Market > Aid grants and contracts. > > I'm being critical here but not trying to place blame on any particular > person at the TDF. I've worked at organizations before where everyone is > working too much for little pay based on the lack of understanding by > sponsors/stakeholders at what's being done. And that is a > marketing/communications/advocacy issue. I love the LO project and what it > does for digital accessibility in poor countries, churches, community > groups, and other places that Microsoft and other big-tech firms exploit. I > don't want the wrong step to be taken that leads to the eventual loss of > community of the project. (Which btw I still don't get the justification > for the lack of a Discourse or NodeBB forum on TDF. How outdated is the > ask.libreoffice software? 5 years now?) > > Cheers, > Kevin > >
