Hi Adam,

On Aug 28, 2005, at 2:34 AM, Adam Moore wrote:

Let me make something clear.  Although I do think that INGOTs is a
great product and I support it whole heartedly, I represent OpenOffice
first and sponsors second.  Let me give you an example.  At the NEA
conference the sponsors were INGOTs and Sub300.  I always pitched
OpenOffice first and then INGOTs then Sub300.  I feel that we need to
predominantly premote OpenOffice, but also promote our sponsors in
someway too.

Thanks for the clarification, Adam. :-)

As to promoting our sponsors, it's a seemingly delicate point. The way we have done this is by having things like a sponsors' page for OOoCon 2005: sponsors are prominently displayed [0]. For other conferences, where OOo has been hosted in another's booth, the issue has been played by ear, as it were. In one case, for MacWorld 2002 (or 2003; can't recall now), we were hosted by BSDMall, which distributes the Mac version in its disks, along with some value- adds. Our presence essentially gave BSDMall more credibility. In another case, the 2002 LWE SF, we were both in the Sun and LTSP booths, the latter being more popular. In this case, the arrangement really benefited both.

But these individual points do not quite get at what you are indicating. So, here is a formulation of a fairly standard practice: When we go to a conference representing OOo we represent OOo. We do not represent the company that has enabled us to go there, though one may certainly thank it and ought in fact to acknowledge one's affiliation. The sponsoring company is in the background. OOo is in the foreground. Our collateral, etc., may thank the sponsoring company or companies, and use their logos. But our message, as you underscore, is OOo independent of any sponsoring company.

How does this work with Sun? Well, every conference there is some tension about this very thing: should OOo be independent, i.e., not in a Sun booth? For many conferences, like for the recent OSCON, Sun's presence there enabled OOo's: wouldn't have been possible otherwise. It thus benefited OOo and its members--you, and Matthew, to name but two, who gave solid presentations. But beside the big icon for Sun, Sun didn't intrude into discussions on OOo and was very careful to separate SO from OOo.

I would suggest then that we need to further formulate groundrules for conferences, e.g., how are sponsors to be mentioned, & roughly how to represent OOo. Along these lines, we need, too, to come up with new compelling examples of OOo in practice. Gotta show, you know, how much *better* we are than certain others ;-)


[0] http://marketing.openoffice.org/ooocon2005/index.html

Reply via email to