Posted May 10, 2013 19:47 UTC (Fri) by BrucePerens (guest, #2510)
Posted May 10, 2013 20:21 UTC (Fri) by rcweir (guest, #48888)
To any reasonable definition of the word, a "vote" selects the outcome. That is not what were doing here. We certainly don't use the word "vote" anywhere in the report. In fact we say quite clearly at the end that we are avoiding a vote and seeking to reach consensus in the community.
As the last paragraph of the blog says:
"We'll then review the revisions, discuss and pick the new logo. As usual at Apache we try to reach consensus by discussion wherever possible, and only vote if necessary."
The survey (or "survey" as you want call it) was seeking user user opinion. Crowd opinion. A bunch of those 50 million users who have downloaded Apache OpenOffice. This is one source of information that feeds into the branding discussion, but it is not the only source of information. And it is certainly not determinative of the outcome.
In your original post you attacked the process and said that we should: "develop consensus based on discussion".
Now that it is clear that we're doing exactly that, I assume we'll get an apology now?
Posted May 10, 2013 21:45 UTC (Fri) by rahvin (subscriber, #16953)
I'm not saying I agree with Bruce, just that you focused on the vote comment without addressing the substance. I have no stake or even opinion on whether amateurs or professional designers do a better jobs on logo's.
Posted May 10, 2013 22:01 UTC (Fri) by rcweir (guest, #48888)
The survey was not to replace professional design experience, but to provide them with supplemental information from users in our actual market (or "amateurs" as you call them).
Do you think that would be OK with Bruce? Or do you think that it is better to make marketing decisions without actually consulting users at any stage?
Posted May 10, 2013 22:16 UTC (Fri) by rcweir (guest, #48888)
For example, even a talented and experienced designer might not know which logo resembled a logo of a political party, or which one had unlucky associations in Chinese. For a global brand like Apache OpenOffice, such feedback from users is not just a good idea, it is essential.
In most cases the professional designers submitted multiple or even many variations on the logo, so information on how they polled was good information even for the professionally-designed logos.
So, it just boggles the mind to think that there are some who just don't get it when it comes to open source. "Given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow" applies to all aspects of the product, not just to source code. So the evident disdain for open source methods, expressed by some here is sad, very sad.
If Bruce wanted to make an constructive contribution we all know he is capable of doing this. But his choice of title and his comments show he was more interested in airing his prejudices against OpenOffice than actually contributing to the topic at hand. He is not alone, sadly. But as I've said before, that is why I pay to subscribe to Lwn.net -- so I can get my FUD a week early.
Posted May 11, 2013 3:18 UTC (Sat) by Trelane (subscriber, #56877)
(Amusingly, i'm wearing my IBM shirt I got from the OU Supercomputing symposium, and worked on software for z/OS. Seems to be an IBM day. :-)
Posted May 11, 2013 3:58 UTC (Sat) by BrucePerens (guest, #2510)
The entire point of "given enough eyeballs" is that the eyeballs belong to competent programmers who are engaged in modifying the code, or at least developing an understanding of the code with the intent of modifying it.
The equivalent would be having a great many qualified marketers work collaboratively. I'm sure you have some, but no so many that "many eyes" applies.
Many eyes with no concept of marketing principles would work on a marketing problem about as well as a roomful of monkeys do at typing out Shakespeare.
Posted May 11, 2013 11:34 UTC (Sat) by rcweir (guest, #48888)
Of course the people filling out the survey are not the competent designers. They represent the target market for the logo, the end users. The people looking at the feedback from the survey are the competent designers. They appreciate the feedback and the comments they received from users in our target market. It is one source of information that feeds into the process, but not the only one.
Of course your analogy is flawed since we're not asking your "monkeys" or (whatever you want to compare open source users to today) to design a logo, or write play. We're only looking for feedback from the very group of people to whom the logo is targeted. Think of it as feedback and part of iterative design. Those familiar with User Centered Design would understand this best. But the concept is not difficult.
Posted May 12, 2013 18:00 UTC (Sun) by shmget (subscriber, #58347)
Btw: to quote yourself, schooling a aoo volunteer:
"But it does mean that we need to be careful
that what we say is accurate and described correctly. It is like how
we're careful to talk about "50 million downloads" and not "50 million
users'. Other projects don't take that care and conflate downloads
and users. I seek a higher standard."
so... Do as I say not as I do ?
Posted May 12, 2013 18:35 UTC (Sun) by rcweir (guest, #48888)
Posted May 12, 2013 18:46 UTC (Sun) by shmget (subscriber, #58347)
oh really? so your users never upgrade, ever ?
none of you users downloaded 3.3 then 3.4 then 3.4.1 ? interesting...
" This is a subtle distinction, so I'm not surprised you are confused about this. "
So subtle that it is in fact complete bull.
Posted May 12, 2013 18:55 UTC (Sun) by rcweir (guest, #48888)
You're better than this, Norbert. If you have a point to make, why don't you try making it, rather than just trying to score cheap points? A word of advice: When you treat your opponent as if he has no intelligence and just go for cheap rhetorical points you also insult the reader. Try to rebut your opponent's strongest arguments, not attack their typographical errors. Otherwise you look petty, and the reader will think that you have no arguments, or ideas, of your own.
Posted May 12, 2013 19:25 UTC (Sun) by shmget (subscriber, #58347)
You did not argue the context, you argued that I was too dumb to grasp the subtlety of the English language.
"You're better than this, Norbert."
I appreciate the condescending compliment, Robert, but it is not like we've met or anything...
"When you treat your opponent as if he has no intelligence and just go for cheap rhetorical points you also insult the reader. "
Hear, Hear.... if only you would heed your own advice...
But rest assured, I do not, by any means, think you lack intelligence; I am merely offended by the amount of bull you think you can get away with.
Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds