Re: [openstack-dev] [OpenStack Foundation] [tc] Take back the naming process
On 01/27/2015 10:35 PM, James E. Blair wrote: > Lauren Sell writes: > >> Hey Monty, >> >> I’d like to weigh in here, because I think there have been some >> misunderstandings around Lemming-gate. I’m glad you raised your >> concerns; it’s a good test of release naming for us all to discuss and >> learn from. >> >> To provide a little context for those new to the discussion, >> historically, when it’s time to name the development cycle, open >> suggestions are taken on a wiki page >> (https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Release_Naming) after which the >> Technical Committee works to create a short list that are then voted >> on by the entire community. Typically, Foundation staff play a role in >> this process to work with our trademark counsel to vet the release >> names. We register them to ensure our rights, and they become >> significant brands for the OpenStack community, as well as all of the >> companies who are building and marketing their products on >> OpenStack. One of the names that was proposed for the L development >> cycle was Lemming. >> >> So little-known fact, I’m actually a huge fan of rodents (I’ve had >> several pet rats), but I’m afraid the name Lemming conjures up more >> than a small mammal. The dictionary.com definition is "a member of any >> large group following an unthinking course towards mass destruction," >> or if you prefer Urban Dictionary, “a member of a crowd with no >> originality or voice of his own. One who speaks or repeats only what >> he has been told. A tool. A cretin.” >> >> When I heard that Lemming was a consideration, I was a bit >> concerned. Most of all, I care about and am protective of this >> community, and I think that would paint us with a pretty big / easy >> target. Regardless, I did the due diligence with our trademark >> counsel, and they provided the following feedback: “The proposed >> trademark LEMMING cleared our preliminary search for the usual >> goods/services, subject to the usual limitations. The majority of >> applications/registrations that others have filed for the term are >> dead (no pun intended). I take this to mean the brand generally has >> problems in the marketplace due to negative connotation.” >> >> So, I reached out to Thierry and a few of the TC members to share my >> perspective and concern from a marketing standpoint. I have a lot of >> respect for you and this community, and I would hate to jeopardize the >> perception of your work. I am very sensitive to the fact that I do not >> have a magical marketing veto; I was simply providing feedback and >> trying to bring another perspective to the conversation. My sense from >> talking to them was that Lemming was kind of a joke and not a serious >> option. I also read the notes of the following TC meeting, and it >> didn’t seem like there was much of an issue...so I stopped worrying >> about it. >> >> (TC meeting notes for reference, you can search Lemming in this >> discussion: >> http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/tc/2015/tc.2015-01-13-20.01.log.txt) >> >> Anyhow, it seems like it’s boiled into a larger issue, and I’m more >> than happy to have the discussion and get more input. I stand by my >> advice and hope our community leaders will make a reasonable >> decision. I certainly don’t want to take the fun out of release >> naming, but at the end of the day we are all pretty fortunate and have >> quite a bit of fun as part of this community. I was just trying to >> protect it. > > I said "lemming" three times in that meeting, (which is three times more > than anyone else), so I should probably respond here. > > That meeting was the first time I heard about the disappearance of > Lemming from the list. I did not feel that the way in which it happened > was in accordance with the way we expected the process to operate. > Nonetheless, due to the vagaries of the current process and out of a > desire to avoid further delay in naming the Lemming release, I chose not > to argue for the inclusion of Lemming in the poll. I continue to hold > that position, and I am not advocating that we include it now. I would like to echo Jim's sentiments that this is largely about the way a decision was made, and not about the decision itself. The below defense of lemmings notwithstanding - I agree that I do not think that lemming is a good name. However, I think there is a very interesting latent conversation available about the nature of choice and also about the media's ability to fabricate complete falsehoods and have them become part of the vernacular. If anyone can't find modern and relevant analogues to the one-sided destruction of the popular image of the lemming in the tech world, they're simply not paying attention. We may not chose to pick up that particular topic as a fight we want to have right now - but I ardently want to be able to have the discussion about it. We have chosen to have an unprecedented amount of corporate involvement in our project - and I think it's proven t
Re: [openstack-dev] [OpenStack Foundation] [tc] Take back the naming process
Lauren Sell writes: > Hey Monty, > > I’d like to weigh in here, because I think there have been some > misunderstandings around Lemming-gate. I’m glad you raised your > concerns; it’s a good test of release naming for us all to discuss and > learn from. > > To provide a little context for those new to the discussion, > historically, when it’s time to name the development cycle, open > suggestions are taken on a wiki page > (https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Release_Naming) after which the > Technical Committee works to create a short list that are then voted > on by the entire community. Typically, Foundation staff play a role in > this process to work with our trademark counsel to vet the release > names. We register them to ensure our rights, and they become > significant brands for the OpenStack community, as well as all of the > companies who are building and marketing their products on > OpenStack. One of the names that was proposed for the L development > cycle was Lemming. > > So little-known fact, I’m actually a huge fan of rodents (I’ve had > several pet rats), but I’m afraid the name Lemming conjures up more > than a small mammal. The dictionary.com definition is "a member of any > large group following an unthinking course towards mass destruction," > or if you prefer Urban Dictionary, “a member of a crowd with no > originality or voice of his own. One who speaks or repeats only what > he has been told. A tool. A cretin.” > > When I heard that Lemming was a consideration, I was a bit > concerned. Most of all, I care about and am protective of this > community, and I think that would paint us with a pretty big / easy > target. Regardless, I did the due diligence with our trademark > counsel, and they provided the following feedback: “The proposed > trademark LEMMING cleared our preliminary search for the usual > goods/services, subject to the usual limitations. The majority of > applications/registrations that others have filed for the term are > dead (no pun intended). I take this to mean the brand generally has > problems in the marketplace due to negative connotation.” > > So, I reached out to Thierry and a few of the TC members to share my > perspective and concern from a marketing standpoint. I have a lot of > respect for you and this community, and I would hate to jeopardize the > perception of your work. I am very sensitive to the fact that I do not > have a magical marketing veto; I was simply providing feedback and > trying to bring another perspective to the conversation. My sense from > talking to them was that Lemming was kind of a joke and not a serious > option. I also read the notes of the following TC meeting, and it > didn’t seem like there was much of an issue...so I stopped worrying > about it. > > (TC meeting notes for reference, you can search Lemming in this > discussion: > http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/tc/2015/tc.2015-01-13-20.01.log.txt) > > Anyhow, it seems like it’s boiled into a larger issue, and I’m more > than happy to have the discussion and get more input. I stand by my > advice and hope our community leaders will make a reasonable > decision. I certainly don’t want to take the fun out of release > naming, but at the end of the day we are all pretty fortunate and have > quite a bit of fun as part of this community. I was just trying to > protect it. I said "lemming" three times in that meeting, (which is three times more than anyone else), so I should probably respond here. That meeting was the first time I heard about the disappearance of Lemming from the list. I did not feel that the way in which it happened was in accordance with the way we expected the process to operate. Nonetheless, due to the vagaries of the current process and out of a desire to avoid further delay in naming the Lemming release, I chose not to argue for the inclusion of Lemming in the poll. I continue to hold that position, and I am not advocating that we include it now. I think the best way to move forward and prevent future misunderstandings is to clarify the process in the way that Monty suggested and begin using it starting with the Miyazaki release. -Jim P.S. I will, however, vociferously defend Lemmings themselves. They are the subject of widely-held misconceptions which have resulted in contempt and outright animal cruelty. Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lemming#Misconceptions and particularly the passage: A Canadian Broadcasting Corporation documentary, 'Cruel Camera', found the lemmings used for 'White Wilderness' were flown from Hudson Bay to Calgary, Alberta, Canada, where they did not jump off the cliff, but were in fact forced off the cliff by the camera crew. __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [OpenStack Foundation] [tc] Take back the naming process
Hey Monty, I’d like to weigh in here, because I think there have been some misunderstandings around Lemming-gate. I’m glad you raised your concerns; it’s a good test of release naming for us all to discuss and learn from. To provide a little context for those new to the discussion, historically, when it’s time to name the development cycle, open suggestions are taken on a wiki page (https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Release_Naming) after which the Technical Committee works to create a short list that are then voted on by the entire community. Typically, Foundation staff play a role in this process to work with our trademark counsel to vet the release names. We register them to ensure our rights, and they become significant brands for the OpenStack community, as well as all of the companies who are building and marketing their products on OpenStack. One of the names that was proposed for the L development cycle was Lemming. So little-known fact, I’m actually a huge fan of rodents (I’ve had several pet rats), but I’m afraid the name Lemming conjures up more than a small mammal. The dictionary.com definition is "a member of any large group following an unthinking course towards mass destruction," or if you prefer Urban Dictionary, “a member of a crowd with no originality or voice of his own. One who speaks or repeats only what he has been told. A tool. A cretin.” When I heard that Lemming was a consideration, I was a bit concerned. Most of all, I care about and am protective of this community, and I think that would paint us with a pretty big / easy target. Regardless, I did the due diligence with our trademark counsel, and they provided the following feedback: “The proposed trademark LEMMING cleared our preliminary search for the usual goods/services, subject to the usual limitations. The majority of applications/registrations that others have filed for the term are dead (no pun intended). I take this to mean the brand generally has problems in the marketplace due to negative connotation.” So, I reached out to Thierry and a few of the TC members to share my perspective and concern from a marketing standpoint. I have a lot of respect for you and this community, and I would hate to jeopardize the perception of your work. I am very sensitive to the fact that I do not have a magical marketing veto; I was simply providing feedback and trying to bring another perspective to the conversation. My sense from talking to them was that Lemming was kind of a joke and not a serious option. I also read the notes of the following TC meeting, and it didn’t seem like there was much of an issue...so I stopped worrying about it. (TC meeting notes for reference, you can search Lemming in this discussion: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/tc/2015/tc.2015-01-13-20.01.log.txt) Anyhow, it seems like it’s boiled into a larger issue, and I’m more than happy to have the discussion and get more input. I stand by my advice and hope our community leaders will make a reasonable decision. I certainly don’t want to take the fun out of release naming, but at the end of the day we are all pretty fortunate and have quite a bit of fun as part of this community. I was just trying to protect it. Best, Lauren > On Jan 27, 2015, at 6:59 PM, Monty Taylor wrote: > > On 01/27/2015 06:05 PM, Jonathan Bryce wrote: >> >>> On Jan 27, 2015, at 3:50 PM, Monty Taylor wrote: >>> >>> I do not like how we are selecting names for our releases right now. >>> The current process is autocratic and opaque and not fun - which is the >>> exact opposite of what a community selected name should be. >> >> Autocratic? Could you elaborate? > > Right now we're starting from a set list of pre-approved names that > there was absolutely no participation in the selection of and about > which discussion is summarily shut down. I know it's with the best of > intentions, but it's not ok. > >>> I propose: >>> >>> * As soon as development starts on release X, we open the voting for the >>> name of release X+1 (we're working on Kilo now, we should have known the >>> name of L at the K summit) >>> >>> * Anyone can nominate a name - although we do suggest that something at >>> least related to the location of the associated summit would be nice >>> >>> * We condorcet vote on the entire list of nominated names >>> >>> * After we have the winning list, the foundation trademark checks the name >>> >>> * If there is a trademark issue (and only a trademark issue - not a >>> "marketing doesn't like the name" issue) we'll move down to the next >>> name on the list >>> >>> If we cannot have this process be completely open and democratic, then >>> what the heck is the point of having our massive meritocracy in the >>> first place? There's a lot of overhead we deal with by being a >>> leaderless collective you know - we should occasionally get to have fun >>> with it. >> >> >> If your goal is to actually involve our massive me
