On 31/05/12 18:03, lluvia wrote:
Maybe just not writing the freedoms in the splash page but in the
deeper
page would be good for keeping the interest on the people: although
I
recognize the high importance of the 4 freedoms, I think they need a
lot of deep knowledge from the lector for
The text is important!
My first idea would be to just mention the four freedoms with a short
introduction.
Additionally we might have practical examples of the freedoms
displayed upon hovering over them, or something like that.
Maybe just not writing the freedoms in the splash page but in
Looking at this, I see both sides. Yes, there is a lot of good info on the
existing FSF pages, but it is LONG...
Arguably the GPL is longer than many proprietary software ULA's, and we know
how many folks read those Add in the GNU software manifesto, and the
lengthy free software
First, maybe b/c I'm a woman, I prefer a logo which is either color or
BW. On posters, flyers and website a black and white logo may be less
visible.
The idea that a label can serve to make people's choices more
ethical and
conscious or to spread freedom is simply wrong, and can only lead to
These labels would also be very useful for network services.
In particular I've been surprised by how difficult it was to find out that
github is not free (especially because they have a link in their help pages
saying this website is open source, but there's no prominent link to this
post
Robert Martinez m...@mray.de writes:
On 23/05/12 23:12, John Sullivan wrote:
There seems to be much disagreement about the effectiveness of the
human readable deed approach. I would suggest for the first iteration
of this, use the existing Free Software Definition page (possibly after
making
Robert Martinez m...@mray.de writes:
By appealing I mean big nice typo, not too much text, friendly
colors and an easy to understand message. Not like a typical page on
fsf.org.
We don't intentionally make pages on fsf.org or gnu.org unappealing. We
hope that people will help us make them
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 12:24 AM, John Sullivan jo...@fsf.org wrote:
Robert Martinez m...@mray.de writes:
By appealing I mean big nice typo, not too much text, friendly
colors and an easy to understand message. Not like a typical page on
fsf.org.
We don't intentionally make pages on
Ramana Kumar ramana.ku...@gmail.com writes:
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 12:24 AM, John Sullivan jo...@fsf.org wrote:
Robert Martinez m...@mray.de writes:
By appealing I mean big nice typo, not too much text, friendly
colors and an easy to understand message. Not like a typical page on
On Sun, 27 May 2012 12:51:47 +0200
al3xu5 / dotcommon dotcom...@autistici.org wrote:
Il giorno mercoledì 23/05/2012 14:47:00 CEST
Robert Martinez m...@mray.de ha scritto:
I think there should be a campaign and I'm curious what you think.
It should be about making ethical choices
On 26/05/12 23:38, v...@ukr.net wrote:
To my mind, the logo should definitely be in black white (or at
least look good enough in black white) since it is the best variant
for printing on T-shirts, for example. And T-shirts may be a good way
of promoting it.
What do you think?
absolutely.
On 27/05/12 12:51, al3xu5 / dotcommon wrote:
I can not understand how trasparent could be something applicable to ethical
choices...
by transparent I mean a well informed state of the situation before
you choose what you think is right.
if for some reason you are uncertain about some
It would be good for free software movement leaving the gnu icon just
for the GNU operating system.
They are different concepts at all, since GNU is free software in the
same way that some *BSDs or SuperTux are: they all satisfy the free
software definition. I know that this distinction has been
2012/5/26 lluvia lluvia_li...@lavabit.com
It would be good for free software movement leaving the gnu icon just
for the GNU operating system.
They are different concepts at all, since GNU is free software in the
same way that some *BSDs or SuperTux are: they all satisfy the free
software
--- On Sat, 5/26/12, Ramana Kumar ramana.ku...@gmail.com wrote:
As an idea more for the brainstorming, I propose that the free software
image/logo be based on a freedom symbol with some of the following
elements {computers, bits, pixels, networks}. Human happiness or natural
things such as
On 25/05/12 19:04, lluvia wrote:
I hope it be as clean as the open source label.
that was my idea. I'm in the process of working on something that is
(among other general design rules):
_international (avoiding letters/text)
_clean in order to perform well on small sizes, too
_black white
On 26/05/12 14:56, IntrosMedia wrote:
Is the purpose of this campaign to create a label specific to free
software?
yes!
In my opinion, even though an icon that represents well and clearly the
idea of freedom would be a good thing for the label, I think it's not that
important. When people
On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 7:11 PM, Robert Martinez m...@mray.de wrote:
_international (avoiding letters/text)
_clean in order to perform well on small sizes, too
_black white for optimal reproduction on any background/material
I think this one should be relaxed to looks good when rendered in
On 26/05/12 20:26, Ramana Kumar wrote:
I think this one should be relaxed to looks good when rendered in
black white / grayscale; looks as good or better in colour; is
obviously the same under both renditions.
I want to avoid any problematic situations.
There is the problem of *any* color
Hello!
On Sat, 26 May 2012 20:34:55 +0200
Robert Martinez m...@mray.de wrote:
I want to avoid any problematic situations.
There is the problem of *any* color that it might not go well with
another and there is the issue of putting people in the position of
making the choice: do I need
I hope it be as clean as the open source label. It is simple, the image
carries an idea and the text open source is easily understandable by a
lot of people, although that particular words doesn't represent exactly
the initiative. I would be using that logo all the time if I shared the
point of
On 23/05/12 23:12, John Sullivan wrote:
There seems to be much disagreement about the effectiveness of the
human readable deed approach. I would suggest for the first iteration
of this, use the existing Free Software Definition page (possibly after
making a few improvements to the
Robert Martinez said:
Most non-technical users cannot see or understand what software freedom is.
They are unable to recognize in how far their choice actually connects to the
idea of free software.
Labeling might be a good thing to do but I'm not sure that I agree with your
reasoning
I'm working on such a project and it should be ready in September.
On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Jason Self ja...@bluehome.net wrote:
Robert Martinez said:
Most non-technical users cannot see or understand what software freedom
is.
They are unable to recognize in how far their choice
On 23/05/12 17:39, Jason Self wrote:
Labeling might be a good thing to do but I'm not sure that I agree with your
reasoning behind it. Your explanation make it seem as if non-technical users
as you describe them are just mindless sheep that passively graze on what
others make available to
On 23/05/12 17:50, Danny Piccirillo wrote:
I'm working on such a project and it should be ready in September.
What is your progress so far?
In how far does my suggested campaign overlap with your project?
On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 1:10 PM, Robert Martinez m...@mray.de wrote:
On 23/05/12 17:50, Danny Piccirillo wrote:
I'm working on such a project and it should be ready in September.
What is your progress so far?
In how far does my suggested campaign overlap with your project?
It is
Robert Martinez m...@mray.de writes:
I think there should be a campaign and I'm curious what you think.
It should be about making ethical choices transparent.
Most non-technical users cannot see or understand what software freedom is.
All they eventually get is a license name and/or
Robert Martinez m...@mray.de writes:
I think we can first link so something pretty easy to digest, similar
to how CC does it:
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ (or maybe even more reduced)
and go into more detail via another link.
There seems to be much disagreement about the
29 matches
Mail list logo
