On 21 May 2013 15:54, Kostas Koudaras <warlordfff(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> If you are seriously thinking of a rename:
> What about openSUSE Jedi?
The problem with a pop-culture reference, is that it creates an inside
joke, which kind of makes new entrants feel excluded.
> Ok I am a Star Wars Fan but afterall, we are geeks...
That might not be a very reasonable assumption in the long run.
> 2013/5/21 Per Jessen <per(a)computer.org>:
> > Greg Freemyer wrote:
> >> On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 3:18 PM, Carlos Ribeiro
> >> <carlosribeiro(a)opensuse.org> wrote:
> >>> "Why do I need to talk with openSUSE Advocate, I did nothing wrong,
> >>> against the law I don't need a Advocate"
> >> That may be a valid concern. I work with lawyers all the time, so I'm
> >> used to the word "advocate" being used routinely.
The use of "Advocate" might be controversial, as Carlos states, due to
the associated legal implication.
While Richard, as a native English speaker, has a very good point, as
in we are intending to tell people that we advocate the use of
openSUSE (distro ++) , and participation in openSUSE (project).
The discomfort with evangelist is very understandable, because of the
bad taste it leaves in the mouth for people who have encountered users
of this label first-hand.
> > I have no issue with "Advocate" (although it also means "lawyer" in my
> > native language). To me, "Advocate" and "Ambassador" both have some
> > connotations of being officially assigned. My favourite is "Geeko" as
> > also proposed by Carlos.
"Geeko", with it's association to openSUSE & Gecko, sonds like a
reasonable choice. However, it says nothing about what the role
entails. This might or might not be an issue. I personally wouldn't
mind being associated with that label, but at the end of the day, it
kind of means nothing.
Advocate and Ambassador kind of mean the same thing in English for
this use case, but Ambassador sounds kind of more approachable imho.
While I understand most of the changes in the program, such as a new
distribution system for DVDs/goodies, I fail to see why a name change
would be necessary, especially when the new name has an identical
meaning for all practical purposes.
Also, I am curious why removing the vetting system was
proposed/implemented. It was a very basic screening, and as there are
actual costs involved in sending stuff to "Advocates", money that is
obviously finite, this would mean we potentially have a system that
cannot support itself. I understand that not all the Advocates will be
sent event/DVD kits indiscriminately, but do we actually need unvetted
labels for every person who tells others, "Use openSUSE"? The promoDVD
request page doesn't have a requirement that anyone have an "official
tag/post" anyway. IIRC, this wild west approach was tried in the early
days of the Ambassador program, which resulted in an insanely long
list of names on the wiki, with people that were never seen, or heard
from. Isn't it exactly what we are trying to do all over again?
TL;DR : Why change the name at all? Why remove vetting of list? If
name is to be changed, "Geeko" sounds awesome, albeit irrelevant, and
would get my vote.
P.S. Re-added marketing list.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-marketing+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-marketing+owner(a)opensuse.org