Re: Debian accepting Social Micropayment?
On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 12:10:57PM +0200, Steffen Möller wrote:
> > Ehm, yeah, and my father is the emperor of china, then.
> > As you know, in Debian we have to deal at least with:
> > - uncorporative upstreams
> > - dead upstreams
> > - corporative upstreams
> which would then fall under the "we don't know what we are doing",
no, we can know what we are doing, if we come to a decision how to
handle those cases.
> and if upstream is not cooperative then one does not loose anything
> either. It is just your pride that hurts.
First of all: Its not *my* pride. I have not even decided whats
my POV in this thing. What I am doing here is telling you (and the
others) that there is a potential problem, because people might
have this POV.
Second: I don't think that this has something to with "hurt pride".
In fact I think that your use of this wording is very unfair
to those people who might have this POV.
Contrary I think that this has something to with "Honour for those who
Yes, I agree that its a good thing if upstreams get something for
what they do (although nobody hinders them from collecting donations as
well). But they are not the only ones doing work. So if you collect
something for the work done by several different people you have
to make sure there is equality.
> > But even for the last group no one can expect our upstreams
> > to share donations with their downstreams. Consider the amount
> > of work this would mean for them. How should this work
> > after all?
> We are not talking about real money. It is only an opportunity
> for our users to feel a bit better in that they can give something back
> when they don't have the technical skills or time to do so.
> I don't care.
Don't we? As far as I understood flattr its possible to get a payout
from the collected flattrs (unless they are done by people who did not
put money into flattr on their own).
So it might be 2 Euros in a year but thats still money.
> > So clearly if we'd want to do this and if we'd want to share
> > what comes in with our own developers we need to do the allocation
> > (or give it into the hands of SPI for obvious reasons) ourselves.
> It is not on me to decide anything. To sum up:
I never said it is. But if you make a proposal like this you
should take into count all possibilities.
> When asking the spontaneous end user to donate, we shall not expect
> them to distinguish between the upstream work and our packaging work.
> I hence find it problematic to collect only for us. A Debian money drop
> point should exist, and we should also use our presence to help upstream
> to get some help, just to be fair, and let the user decide what route to go.
Ehm aren't your two statements conflicting with each other? You want to
give the choice to the user but you don't expect him to be able to