Re: [Debconf-team] RFC on the DC15 sponsorship brochure
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 6:13 PM, Richard Hartmann
<richih.mailinglist@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 9:46 PM, Sebastian Harl <tokkee@debian.org> wrote:
>> It was discussed to mention that job offerings should be limited to the
>> job wall (instead of, e.g., the conference bag). I suggest to add the
>> following to the "Swag bags and raffle prizes" section:
>
> During yesterday's Debian MUC meeting, azeem, Conny, and me came to
> the conclusion that we need to avoid people gaming the system, yet
> can't anticipate everything. So a generic "we reserve the right to
> preview all input, material, etc and reject anything we deem
> inappropriate and/or against the spirit of Debian, DebConf, or
> sponsorhip. Of course, we will let you know ASAP and try to work out a
> solution" should cover everything.
>
> Specific example: If your sponsorship level allows for conference bag
> swag _and_ job wall postings, feel free to toss job offerings into
> said swag bag. If your level only covers swag bag and not job wall,
> you can't have us distribute this material; unless you upgrade your
> level of support, that is.
I don't agree with this. I don't really think we should be in the position of
policing swag bag materials, nor should we be projecting that we're
worried that sponsors are going to do stupid things. (Obviously, best
judgement for inappropriate materials, but if a sponsor wants to throw in
a 40 page document on why they are awesome, which would reflect poorly
on them, I'd say perhaps talk to them and make them realize it's probably
not a good idea, but I don't think we should prevent it. (I can't think of any
recent examples of items that would even come close to being problematic.)
Also, since sponsor bag is for bronze+, as is job wall, I think we are
overworrying here.
-Brian
> Richard
> _______________________________________________
> Debconf-team mailing list
> Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org
> http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Reply to: