On Wednesday, 5 June 2019 16:11:57 CEST Robert Schweikert wrote:
And your statement is not consistent with statements made in the open Board meeting at Osc and not consistent with what was stated by Richard, let me repeat:
""" The primary motivator for the Foundation is to better handle financial transactions and to attract sponsors - period. """
I am not implying that related topics should be ignored, but we should give them proper weight.
We definitely should. What weight is the right weight for each of them nonetheless needs discussion again and has nothing to do with inconsistent statements.
The discussion in this thread mostly focuses around control of the mark and why that may or more may not be important.
Based on that it appears to me that the first question we need to answer for ourselves is if it is important to control the mark, and how important it is?
Is that a question or a statement? I can only speak for myself, but that is not the main question and has never been. But it is a question that needs an answer and I'd say: Yes, we should control the brand and trademark and be the copyright owners of our own community's and foundation's name because otherwise we'd be dependent on others.
And that is being discussed with arguments on either side of the topic.
The rest follows from there. The original question, paraphrased, "change the name or not?" becomes superfluous once we agree, possibly vote on, whether complete control of the mark is something that we want or not.
But again it all flows from the answer to the question, what is the driving factor, or more broadly formulated, what are the driving factors? And then the follow on question, what is the relative importance of the various factors.
Based on the discussion it would appear that topics around the mark are more important than handling the finances. Otherwise one would think we'd talk about how it would work to open accounts, where they would be located, if there would be membership dues, if we get hardware where that would be located etc. Basically things around financial and sponsorship topics. None of those topics are going to be straight forward. Yet the majority of the messages are around the mark.
And here is the crux, two different answers to the same question. One person proclaiming the main factor is financial and another proclaiming that risks associated with not owning the mark are the driving factors.
I can only find one main driving factor. But that doesn't limit our discussion to only that one driving factor. There is more to consider than that. Otherwise it'd render the whole discussion useless, because those side effects are what we need to discuss.
And yes certainly we can in some way construct a way in which owning the mark is connected to money.
You don't need to construct a link that's already there.
The conditions are determined by the choices we make.
That's another no-brainer and only logical. So, yes, exactly that's why we are discussion the influence of all thinkable choices on the conditions under which a foundation would have to operate. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org