View Single Post
Moderator | Posts: 5,320 | Thanked: 4,464 times | Joined on Oct 2009
#118
Originally Posted by ajalkane View Post
I like Aeolus or the other Aeris one the best. But let's not make this any more difficult than it must be for those working on this, or those who will work on it in future. If the name has been already used in a way that could, even if it's unlikely, to cause problem in future it's not worth it.

My gut reaction to Hildon was the same as many who opposed it in this thread. But practicalities should trump wrestling over the name of the foundation. I don't think the foundation name will have much visibility compared to what the community will call itself and what domain it will converge itself under. As far as I've understood that can be a different topic.
Wisest post here yet....
Unless there's still some who really want a consensus decision on a NFP name rather than sticking with what was predetermined*, then I think we should forget the whole thing.
The next thing is the site name & or domain, we can begin discussion & if a consensus on something different to the status-quo is reached, then (to avoid excessive complication) it can be acted on long after the transition's completed.

*and if practicalities allow that for councilors.

Originally Posted by benny1967 View Post
Actually, you have been very vocal against the name proposed by the people who worked on the initial document.
Try reading again, I was referring to some users vocal opposition to change from current site/domain name, I was NOT referring to people's opposition to changing NFP entity name.
I was NOT saying there was anything wrong with that vocal opposition, just mentioning that there is already some strong opinions against it.

I found it personally irritating that you named this thread "We need a name for the NFP entity that we're changing to: add your suggestions!" as if it were a search for something new (when in fact you only wanted to replace the proposal already made).
Your first post in this thread doesn't make things clear, either. Even though I know that when you wrote it, the proposal for a "Hildon Foundation" was in place, there's nothing in that post to make it clear. To me, it still read: "Hey, we're moving to a new legal entity, do you have any ideas for a name?" instead of "The new entity will probably named Hildon Foundation, but I, jalyst, am against that. Any other suggestions?"
You've GOT to be freaking kidding me....
I freaking spoke to the councilors, they said: "Sure go ahead & discuss alternative names, should a consensus be different to the current tentative suggestion*, so be it."
That's ALL I've attempted to do, don't you freaking try to suggest otherwise matey!

*Which -incidentally- had been decided on with little to no prior widespread community consultation**, yet that doesn't seem to be your concern, does it.

**and I dont criticize them for picking out SOMETHING (after some discussion on the mail-list), can totally understand their motivation/rationale for that.

Last edited by jalyst; 2012-09-17 at 06:55.
 

The Following User Says Thank You to jalyst For This Useful Post: