On 11/16/06, Louis Suarez-Potts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 2006-11-16, at 07:30 , Kaj Kandler wrote:
> Agreed, I'd rather go to work as well to fix the current page first
> and then see where we go from there. Do you see any sense in that? Or
> do you feel this is a waste of time and effort?
No, not at all. The changeover to a for-fee wiki (or equiv or not)
^^^^^^^^
Could you please indicate if you could agree that there also continues to
exist a *non-paying* page that lists a number of consultants on the
openoffice.org website ?
I would strongly prefer the project also keeps a non-paying consultants
page on its website, because I am afraid of too much "false positives"
(that is: consultant entries that have genuine value to the project and its
users, but that for some reason or another, do not want to pay the fee
to be listed on the paying sponsors site).
Next to that, I do see value in a paying "sponsors" site, and that requires
a separate policy and more detailed management, but for a smaller
amount of entries.
Thanks,
Peter
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
