On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 4:54 PM, Nelson Marques <07721(a)ipam.pt> wrote:
On Fri, 2010-04-23 at 16:03 -0400, Nicholas Ozorak wrote:
> 1) I think material should unquestionably be provided. It
> also be clear to content providers what they are permitted to use
> (logos, screenshots, etc) without fear of repercussions.
The licensing is pretty good and useful for people to work, though about
logo's they have their own guidelines and from my point of view while we
should neglect some stuff, we should enforce time to time some
corrections on stuff that can be harmful to the brand itself.
There should be some section somewhere that clearly states what can
and can't be used in videos, namely logos and screenshots. That will
help to prevent confusion on the part of content creators.
> 2) We should unquestionably show support for their work. If they do
> not receive any forms of feedback, they may lose interest.
Indeed, but the main question is actually how should we provide such?
Should we contact authors who make freelance work and ask them if we can
distribute their work also? I mean, some of those videos are pretty
awesome, we could probably establish a protocol with people (or some
other non-formal way) to encourage their work, maybe before we make big
news public with our press releases, make the info available to known
media partners so they have something to work for?
Providing feedback can be done through commenting on videos and
inviting content creators to the marketing list, as they may not
already be aware it exists. If the content creators' work is not on
Internet Archive, asking them if we may redistribute their video may
not be a bad idea.
Keeping media partners in the loop (and ahead of it, in some ways)
would definitely be a good idea. They could provide extra hype before
the official releases.
On a different perspective, I've represented Logitech in the past
(2002/2003). Logitech provides their partners (mainly their resellers,
their premier distribution channel for "Logitech", ignoring the great
core business in OEM) with very competitve advantages. Maybe we should
get to know some potential distribution channels for information and
think over on something that would allow them also to present good
information and giving them some time to work it out?
One such person who could potentially bring a lot of traffic to Fedora
is a man by the name of Chris Pirillo. He's a YouTube vlogger who
talks about technology. His YouTube channel is here:
With over 120,000 subscribers, contacting him about promoting Fedora
13 wouldn't be a bad place to start.
> 3) I think that a small program would benefit us overall. Personally,
> I'm still keen on the idea of having someone from Marketing manage a
> YouTube account and accept works that do the best job of showcasing
> Fedora's capabilities.
Well, as I see it... Most people don't actually separate the
contents/support from the channel of distribution. I mean... some of
this things are really weird (at a personal level, absurd would be a
better description). I am fond of using Youtube aswell, why? Because
most people use it. So... I'm cutting my digital TV service and go back
to RF technology because it deploys contents in über proprietary
technology? bah... sure... right...
As long as the content licenses are in our favor, I dont see why care
much about the platform for distribution.
Lets imagine this... I'm sponsoring 5K t-shirts with the Fedora
Foundation to ambassadors... I probably won't find no one to print them
out using OSS technology :( So, no t-shirts.
> 4) I'm from outside of the community, but I think that lurking without
> any engagement will discourage people from contributing ideas. Taking
> notes is important, but so is engagement.
Same here, and sometimes it's really frustrating. I understand the
values, but I have to say that despite I don't like Ubuntu (and my main
reason should be clear to everyone, and its personal view... African
Words? Sure they contributed a lot to the Digital Era! _NOT_!), but as
product, I do support them to break some barriers that other community
seem to make a crusade of it. The bigger is the market penetration of a
product, the better. Sure we all earn from Canonical's ambitious moves
(August will be astonishing for what I've heard), but so far, they are
leading the way for all FOSS people. We will fail on "First" for sure
against Canonical from that perspective.
> > Can we for Fedora 14 work on feature profiles maybe earlier on and
> > some material already prepared for people doing reviews? Should we
> > actually start a program or campaign so that we can provide
> > information for everyone who wants to do this kind of work?
> I think this is crucial, as it would illustrate how much Fedora values
> its users and contributors.
Same here. I do recon it might be hard to work with very extensive
materials, as some are for sure hard to forecast, but we should focus a
bit more. I'm going to give a quick example, and please dont attack me!
It's a valid reason... why are we working on stuff that is deeply
related to products that are in the end of the life time cycle? Waste of
time, NO... but we would earn more if we were working in future stuff.
I don't know exactly how to put up such a thing... but if anyone has
ideas, I'm listening and willing to help.
I, too, am willing to listen to other suggestions. If anyone has
thoughts on the matter, please feel free to chime in.