On 09/20/2016 10:03 AM, Denver Gingerich wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 07:40:31AM -0700, Aaron Wolf wrote:
>> Of all the
>> options proposed "Crowdmatching for public goods" feels like the least
>> mental work to read and parse.
> Overall I like that slogan.
> There is one point I haven't seen come up in discussion (apologies if I 
> missed it) but should be highlighted.  I don't have a strong personal opinion 
> on how important this point is, but because of whose point it is and the 
> projects Snowdrift.coop aims to support, it should at least be mentioned:
> https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#DigitalGoods
> Now the slogan doesn't say "digital goods", but it does use "goods" in a way 
> that to me felt slightly confusing initially (and would probably be more 
> confusing to most people, since they spend less time thinking about software 
> than the majority of us).
> I don't know if there are good alternatives, though.  "Public works" isn't an 
> option since it has its own meaning ( 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_works ) and "public works of authorship" 
> feels a bit long to me.
> Anyway, I just wanted to highlight this.  To me, the current slogan shouldn't 
> be rejected solely on the basis of this, but it at least warrants a review by 
> people more connected to the project than I.
> Denver
> http://ossguy.com/

Thanks for the thoughts, Denver! To address the concern: Yes, the
metaphor of "goods" inherently causes problems in terms of thinking
about non-rivalrous works, but actually "public goods" is the precise,
accepted term in economics for non-rivalrous, non-exclusive works. See

So, it's not just a sorta-good description, it's *the* correct term for
precisely what we're focusing on.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Discuss mailing list

Reply via email to