On Mar 16, 2010, at 10:08 PM, Scott Gray wrote: > On 16/03/2010, at 9:44 PM, David E Jones wrote: > >> >> On Mar 16, 2010, at 7:18 PM, Scott Gray wrote: >> >>> On 16/03/2010, at 6:58 PM, David E Jones wrote: >>>> >>>> On Mar 16, 2010, at 6:49 PM, Scott Gray wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 16/03/2010, at 6:39 PM, David E Jones wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I'll admit I empathize with what Sharan is expressing here. It's hard to >>>>>> do stuff, or know how to do stuff and what to do, when there are a bunch >>>>>> of people responding with implied policies or with vetoes for this and >>>>>> that. >>>>> >>>>> Well let's document it so everyone knows what the community policy is. >>>>> Please feel free to comment on the guidelines I proposed elsewhere in >>>>> this thread. >>>>> >>>>> You've quite clearly stepped away from taking an administrative position >>>>> within the community and it would be nice if we didn't spend too much >>>>> time criticizing people who are trying to help fill that void. >>>> >>>> Oh, is that what's happening? I guess I missed that... I didn't even >>>> realize there was an administrative void. Maybe it goes further than >>>> that... when I was the PMC Chair maybe a lot of stuff went on that needed >>>> more "administration" when I didn't think any interference was necessary. >>>> Or, maybe that has nothing to do with the PMC Chair role anyway... >>> >>> These front page issues are ones that I haven't seen the community have to >>> deal with before so I have no idea how you might have dealt with it back >>> when you were more involved. I wasn't referring to the PMC Chair position >>> as such, more so the general guidance that you used to provide on all >>> things OFBiz and the weight that such guidance carried. >>> >>> If you feel that some of the links posted recently are perfectly acceptable >>> then let's discuss that, otherwise I'm not really sure of the point you're >>> trying to get across. >> >> My point is that we need to really do something, or we need to do nothing. >> We're getting into areas of marketing and promotion for community members, >> and that's a tough topic in a community driven primarily be contracting >> service providers. There are a few hobbyists that contribute to the project, >> but not a whole lot. There are a few product companies that do independent >> marketing that contribute, but not a whole lot. AFAIK that is pretty >> different from most ASF projects. >> >> While we don't allow blatant marketing on the official web site (it is >> allowed in the wiki, and we even have specific places for it) > > You make this sound like a policy
I'm just referring to the ASF policy as for certain things not allowed on project sites. -David
