Subject: Re: street performer protocol
From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" <turnbull@sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 15:25:30 +0900 (JST)

>>>>> "Craig" == Craig Brozefsky <craig@red-bean.com> writes:

    Craig> "Stephen J. Turnbull" <turnbull@sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> writes:

    >> Nor is the scenario of simultaneous implosion implausible.
    >> Debian, for religious reasons, I presume, makes it quite
    >> difficult to install KDE.

    Craig> Stephen, your presumption that Debian's issues with the KDE
    Craig> license are religious in nature are entirely ungrounded.

Thank you for the correction.

    Craig> I'm not sure your analysis of Gnome stands either.  But
    Craig> since I am not heavily involved with the project to a point
    Craig> where I would know what effects RHs "unfunding" would have,
    Craig> I have to give you the benefit of the doubt.  If it is
    Craig> indeed the case I think it's a mistep for Gnome, and not a
    Craig> general problem with FS projects.

Huh?  If somebody wants to give you a lot of money to realize your
dream, basically for free, you don't call it a "misstep" to take it.
You do what you can to make sure it keeps coming and to find additional
(alternative, in the downside scenario) sources.  But you do take it.

My point is that your project may not be able to keep those sources of
funds in business.  Nor can everybody give their life to software as
rms has, more power to him.  That means that if the money slows, so
does development.

More, faster, development is not the only good thing.  But it's what
economics can analyze, and it's a large part of what interests FSBers.
And it surely provides great benefits to "the community" and the wider
society.

No?

    Craig> Projects have survived for a long time without FSBs, and
    Craig> the same strategies they deployed then can be re-deployed
    Craig> in the future if funding from FS vendors becoms scarce.

Sure.  But development pace will slow down.  I'm talking about FS*B*s
which are definitely interested in money and continuation.  I don't
expect that much, if any, of what I've written in this thread will
apply to the more general "projects" and the social movement.

But projects are not products, and thriving FSBs are needed in many
cases to create products out of projects.  Thriving FSBs will provide
support for projects, almost automatically, although not necessarily
the same projects that charity-oriented community members prefer.

    Craig> For an FSB, this can mean ensuring that the community for
    Craig> projects you supports extends beyond the bounds of your
    Craig> organization.

"Ask not what the community can do for your FSB, ask instead how your
FSB can support the community."

Etc, etc.  Again, this is part good business and part dedication to
the social movement.  But unlike the social movement, the FSB will
disappear if it doesn't make money.  It can't make money if it doesn't
have a competitive product.  Competitive products don't grow on trees,
or programmers would work in orchards.  So you have to make money, to
support development, so you can make money, to do more development.

What I want to do is find ways to encourage implementations of FSBs
where "making money" need not dominate the FSB's planning, but rather
is a natural outgrowth of the fun, socially beneficial development and
support activities of the FSB.  I don't think putting projects first
will contribute effectively to that end.  So I focus on products,
marketing, and finance in this thread.


-- 
University of Tsukuba                Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN
Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences       Tel/fax: +81 (298) 53-5091
_________________  _________________  _________________  _________________
What are those straight lines for?  "XEmacs rules."