RFC: SFI Vision & Objectives
Dear Software Freedom Lovers, Software Freedom International is planning to adopt the following vision and objective statements within the next two weeks, and we would love to hear your comments first. Please send comments to sfd-discuss@ or info@. Regards, Matt Oquist (Secretary, SFI) Vision: "Our vision is to empower all people to freely connect, create and share in a digital world that is participatory, transparent, and sustainable." Objectives: 1: ...to celebrate software freedom and the people behind it 2: ...to foster a general understanding of software freedom, and encourage adoption of free software and open standards 3: ...to create more equal access to opportunities through the use of participatory technologies 4: ...to promote constructive dialogue on responsibilities and rights in the information society 5: ...to be inclusive of organizations and individuals that share our Vision 6: ...to be pragmatic, transparent, and responsible as an organization -- --------------------------------------------------------- SoftwareFreedomDay.org : Celebrating Free and Open Source Software in Your Community info AT softwarefreedomday.org http://softwarefreedomday.org/ SFD Sponsors: http://canonical.com http://ibm.com Software Freedom Day is a project of Software Freedom International. Software Freedom International is a registered corporation in the state of New Hampshire, USA.
Dear Matt Oquist, Vision: "Our vision is to empower all people to freely connect, create and share in a digital world that is participatory, transparent,inclusive and sustainable." my input,the objectives is okay by me. Keep doing the good work. Best regards, Cheers, Olukayode Akanni, Executive Secretary|www.knowledgehouseafrica.org "Help and have account"|DesignIT Project --------------------------------- Never miss an email again! Yahoo! Toolbar alerts you the instant new Mail arrives. Check it out.
Great! We're glad you like them. :) Best of luck on your '07 plans, Matt Akanni 'Kayode wrote: [Wed Mar 07 2007, 07:00:44AM EST]
Dear Matt Oquist,
Vision: "Our vision is to empower all people to freely connect, create and share in a digital world that is participatory, transparent,inclusive and sustainable." my input,the objectives is okay by me. Keep doing the good work.
Best regards,
Cheers, Olukayode Akanni, Executive Secretary|www.knowledgehouseafrica.org "Help and have account"|DesignIT Project
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Never miss an email again! Yahoo! Toolbar alerts you the instant new Mail arrives. Check it out.
_______________________________________________ SFD-discuss mailing list SFD-discuss@sf-day.org http://mail.sf-day.org/lists/listinfo/sfd-discuss
-- --------------------------------------------------------- SoftwareFreedomDay.org : Celebrating Free and Open Source Software in Your Community info AT softwarefreedomday.org http://softwarefreedomday.org/ SFD Sponsors: http://canonical.com http://ibm.com Software Freedom Day is a project of Software Freedom International. Software Freedom International is a registered corporation in the state of New Hampshire, USA.
Thanks Matt, Good principles. But the more developed a project, the more extra complications?.. There is a _big_ problem here with SFI process 'transparency': Matt Oquist wrote:
Software Freedom International is planning to adopt the following vision and objective statements within the next two weeks, and we would love to hear your comments..
<snips>
Vision: "Our vision is to empower all people to freely connect, create and share in a digital world that is participatory, transparent, and sustainable."
Objectives: 6: ...to be pragmatic, transparent, and responsible as an organization --------------------------------------------------------- SoftwareFreedomDay.org : Celebrating Free and Open Source Software [FOSS] in Your Community
While the overall statement drift has been positive, the substance is seemingly different. Like, please reconcile your footer above, which precisely echoes the long-standing SFD home page - "Software Freedom Day is a global, grassroots effort to educate the public about the virtues and availability of Free and Open Source Software [FOSS]" - with this: "Decision on policy of terminology to be used: * FLOSS" http://www.softwarefreedomday.org/sfi/minutes/Minutes-07-03-01 Why start confusing people like this now? Project contributors have been signed on to the standing SFD FOSS terminology/deal for three years already, so this seems both abrupt and inappropriate as a 'top-down' foisted change. It recurs in the SFI minutes, so there is no doubt about this muddying of the SFD project aims. Please let us know how we can maintain the "FOSS" status quo, for bigger and brighter SFDs :) Regards and thanks again, Rik Tindall pp Team Christchurch, Aotearoa-NZ
Hi Rik,
There is a _big_ problem here with SFI process 'transparency':
Yes; we're working on that. By stating this in our vision statement we're setting a new standard for SFI. That doesn't mean we've achieved it already. :)
Objectives: 6: ...to be pragmatic, transparent, and responsible as an organization --------------------------------------------------------- SoftwareFreedomDay.org : Celebrating Free and Open Source Software [FOSS] in Your Community
While the overall statement drift has been positive, the substance is seemingly different. Like, please reconcile your footer above, which precisely echoes the long-standing SFD home page - "Software Freedom Day is a global, grassroots effort to educate the public about the virtues and availability of Free and Open Source Software [FOSS]" - with this:
"Decision on policy of terminology to be used: * FLOSS"
http://www.softwarefreedomday.org/sfi/minutes/Minutes-07-03-01
Why start confusing people like this now? Project contributors have been signed on to the standing SFD FOSS terminology/deal for three years already, so this seems both abrupt and inappropriate as a 'top-down' foisted change. It recurs in the SFI minutes, so there is no doubt about this muddying of the SFD project aims.
I think I'm less concerned than you are that "FOSS"->"FLOSS" will confuse people. Also, this is not a foisted change; we're having this conversation right now on this public list. That's the point...which brings us back to "transparency", above. Lastly, we haven't even adopted the vision statement yet, it's still under discussion (which is what we're doing). And even if we had adopted it, it wouldn't've been implemented instantly. So no worries -- is your reason for concern about changing "FOSS" to "FLOSS" that the target audience of SFD will be confused? I don't personally have strong feelings one way or the other about using FOSS v. FLOSS, but after our discussion at the F2F I am inclined toward FLOSS, and of course the argument there is that including "Libre" helps to *avoid* confusing our target audience. Do you disagree? Regards, Matt -- --------------------------------------------------------- SoftwareFreedomDay.org : Celebrating Free and Open Source Software in Your Community info AT softwarefreedomday.org http://softwarefreedomday.org/ SFD Sponsors: http://canonical.com http://ibm.com Software Freedom Day is a project of Software Freedom International. Software Freedom International is a registered corporation in the state of New Hampshire, USA.
Hi Matt, SFD-discuss, Matt Oquist wrote:
By stating this in our vision statement we're setting a new standard for SFI. That doesn't mean we've achieved it already. :)
Good response, thanks. Joining the far-distant dots does take time, and agreed that on this defining point we have duly begun.
Objectives: 6: ...to be pragmatic, transparent, and responsible as an organization
Adding context, "pragmatic" is a giveaway, laden term here. In that it's Linus's respect-worthy catchphrase. But the great energy of SFD has largely come from visible brand neutrality: BSD is as good as Linux is as good as GNU is as good as Open-Source for Windows, for SFD purposes. This even-handed formula has worked exceedingly well, for SFD team building. Issue is thus taken with "FLOSS" for being an unnecessary agenda to change that. So "pragmatic" in SFD's case is more likely to be to stick with the FOSS (steady project growth) status quo, imho.
SoftwareFreedomDay.org : Celebrating Free and Open Source Software [FOSS] in Your Community
..SFD home page - "Software Freedom Day is a global, grassroots effort to educate the public about the virtues and availability of Free and Open Source Software [FOSS]"
"Decision on policy of terminology to be used: * FLOSS"
http://www.softwarefreedomday.org/sfi/minutes/Minutes-07-03-01
Why start confusing people like this now? Project contributors have been signed on to the standing SFD FOSS terminology/deal for three years already, so this seems both abrupt and inappropriate as a 'top-down' foisted change. It recurs in the SFI minutes, so there is no doubt about this muddying of the SFD project aims.
I think I'm less concerned than you are that "FOSS"->"FLOSS" will confuse people. Also, this is not a foisted change; we're having this conversation right now on this public list. That's the point...which brings us back to "transparency", above.
For us here, there's no confusion: they mean the same thing. Changing our language mid-course is better than doing it later, admittedly, if there is sufficient argument supporting it. But otherwise, it is the confusion sold into a predominantly uninformed marketplace that is the real issue. It looked like we'd made up our minds at the start, and positively. That is, if you were establishing as a vendor of cola in the early twentieth century, you might have marketed under the brand name 'pespi' or as 'coke' - but not both. Deciding our most advantageous identity is fundamental to growth; an inability to discern between such similar contents might drive customers off in the direction of 'sprite', for e.g. This is a useful parallel to examine, at least. But the substantive argument is this: "Free" means free/libre in our world anyway, which is a parallel term to "Open Source". Open-source was implicit in Free Software from the start, so is actually a redundant spec to many. But as long as it's useful to work with Open-Source marketing, then it should be kept in balance with Free Software - which is what the FOSS term achieves. There's no need to state Free/Libre if you are adding Open-Source, because that is spurious repetition of the very same meaning. It strikes me that adding /Libre to Free, within FOSS, serves primarily one destructive purpose - to break up the phrase "Free Software". This is categorically both a bad idea and contrary to the more neutral flavour that SFD has assiduously attained. I'm sure there are very many of us who have adopted SFD heartily and specifically because of the clear and prominent sense in which Free Software has meaning within "Software Freedom". We do not wish to see this position undermined. If it seems like I've taken this issue too seriously, let me explain. Our SFD team has grown steadily over the past three years, except for one major glitch encountered last year. And that was due to a Windows-based entrepreneur derailing our process somewhat, in a strong effort to shunt our SFD FOSS marketing tradition onto "FLOSS". This painful experience left such a deep impression that we probably now require SFI's explicit backing of FOSS, in order to continue.
Lastly, we haven't even adopted the vision statement yet, it's still under discussion (which is what we're doing). And even if we had adopted it, it wouldn't've been implemented instantly.
Thanks, that's reassuring.
So no worries -- is your reason for concern about changing "FOSS" to "FLOSS" that the target audience of SFD will be confused? I don't
Yes, largely. As above.
personally have strong feelings one way or the other about using FOSS v. FLOSS, but after our discussion at the F2F I am inclined toward FLOSS, and of course the argument there is that including "Libre" helps to *avoid* confusing our target audience. Do you disagree?
Completely. It's redundant verbiage to 'expand' FOSS to "FLOSS". Only negative outcomes can result from adopting it. Mainly because it adds the job of debating an unnecessary change while we need to be preparing our teams :) But next because there is zero logic to it anyway. Instead, it would be signifying some other force for change.
Regards, Matt --------------------------------------------------------- SoftwareFreedomDay.org : Celebrating Free and Open Source Software in Your Community info AT softwarefreedomday.org http://softwarefreedomday.org/
SFD Sponsors: http://canonical.com http://ibm.com
Software Freedom Day is a project of Software Freedom International. Software Freedom International is a registered corporation in the state of New Hampshire, USA. _______________________________________________ SFD-discuss mailing list SFD-discuss@sf-day.org http://mail.sf-day.org/lists/listinfo/sfd-discuss
Cheers & hth, Rik Tindall pp SFD Team Christchurch, Aotearoa-NZ
Hi Matt, SFD-discuss, Matt Oquist wrote:
By stating this in our vision statement we're setting a new standard for SFI. That doesn't mean we've achieved it already. :)
Good response, thanks. Joining the far-distant dots does take time, and agreed that on this defining point we have duly begun..
Objectives: 6: ...to be pragmatic, transparent, and responsible as an organization
Adding context, "pragmatic" is a giveaway, laden term here. In that it's Linus's respect-worthy catchphrase. But the great energy of SFD has largely come from visible brand neutrality: BSD is as good as Linux is as good as GNU is as good as Open-Source for Windows, for SFD purposes. This even-handed formula has worked exceedingly well, for SFD team building. Issue is thus taken with "FLOSS" for being an unnecessary agenda to change that. So "pragmatic" in SFD's case is more likely to be to stick with the FOSS (steady project growth) status quo, imho.
SoftwareFreedomDay.org : Celebrating Free and Open Source Software [FOSS] in Your Community
..SFD home page - "Software Freedom Day is a global, grassroots effort to educate the public about the virtues and availability of Free and Open Source Software [FOSS]"
"Decision on policy of terminology to be used: * FLOSS"
http://www.softwarefreedomday.org/sfi/minutes/Minutes-07-03-01
Why start confusing people like this now? Project contributors have been signed on to the standing SFD FOSS terminology/deal for three years already, so this seems both abrupt and inappropriate as a 'top-down' foisted change. It recurs in the SFI minutes, so there is no doubt about this muddying of the SFD project aims.
I think I'm less concerned than you are that "FOSS"->"FLOSS" will confuse people. Also, this is not a foisted change; we're having this conversation right now on this public list. That's the point...which brings us back to "transparency", above.
For us here, there's no confusion: they mean the same thing. Changing our language mid-course is better than doing it later, admittedly, if there is sufficient argument supporting it. But otherwise, it is the confusion sold into a predominantly uninformed marketplace that is the real issue. It looked like we'd made up our minds at the start, and positively. That is, if you were establishing as a vendor of cola in the early twentieth century, you might have marketed under the brand name 'pespi' or as 'coke' - but not both. Deciding our most advantageous identity is fundamental to growth; an inability to discern between such similar contents might drive customers off in the direction of 'sprite', for e.g. This is a useful parallel to examine, at least. But the substantive argument is this: "Free" means free/libre in our world anyway, which is a parallel term to "Open Source". Open-source was implicit in Free Software from the start, so is actually a redundant spec to many. But as long as it's useful to work with Open-Source marketing, then it should be kept in balance with Free Software - which is what the FOSS term achieves. There's no need to state Free/Libre if you are adding Open-Source, because that is spurious repetition of the very same meaning. It strikes me that adding /Libre to Free, within FOSS, serves primarily one destructive purpose - to break up the phrase "Free Software". This is categorically both a bad idea and contrary to the more neutral flavour that SFD has assiduously attained. I'm sure there are very many of us who have adopted SFD heartily and specifically because of the clear and prominent sense in which Free Software has meaning within "Software Freedom". We do not wish to see this position undermined. If it seems like I've taken this issue too seriously, let me explain. Our SFD team has grown steadily over the past three years, except for one major glitch encountered last year. And that was due to a Windows-based entrepreneur derailing our process somewhat, in a strong effort to shunt our SFD FOSS marketing tradition onto "FLOSS". This painful experience left such a deep impression that we probably now require SFI's explicit backing of FOSS, in order to continue.
Lastly, we haven't even adopted the vision statement yet, it's still under discussion (which is what we're doing). And even if we had adopted it, it wouldn't've been implemented instantly.
Thanks, that's reassuring.
So no worries -- is your reason for concern about changing "FOSS" to "FLOSS" that the target audience of SFD will be confused? I don't
Yes, largely. As above.
personally have strong feelings one way or the other about using FOSS v. FLOSS, but after our discussion at the F2F I am inclined toward FLOSS, and of course the argument there is that including "Libre" helps to *avoid* confusing our target audience. Do you disagree?
Completely. It's redundant verbiage to 'expand' FOSS to "FLOSS". Only negative outcomes can result from adopting it. Mainly because it adds the job of debating an unnecessary change while we need to be preparing our teams :) But next because there is zero logic to it anyway. Instead, it would be signifying some other force for change.
Regards, Matt --------------------------------------------------------- SoftwareFreedomDay.org : Celebrating Free and Open Source Software in Your Community info AT softwarefreedomday.org http://softwarefreedomday.org/
SFD Sponsors: http://canonical.com http://ibm.com
Software Freedom Day is a project of Software Freedom International. Software Freedom International is a registered corporation in the state of New Hampshire, USA. _______________________________________________ SFD-discuss mailing list SFD-discuss@sf-day.org http://mail.sf-day.org/lists/listinfo/sfd-discuss
Cheers & hth, Rik Tindall pp SFD Team Christchurch, Aotearoa-NZ
participants (3)
-
Akanni 'Kayode -
Matt Oquist -
Rik Tindall