[Council] Community Awards: final results - Page 9 - maemo.org

Active Topics

U-Boot for Nokia RX-51 with BootMenu (updated version 2012.10-rc3-1) (841)
to Alternatives by omniteal@pm.me - 1 hr, 39 mins ago
List of well performing apps on Leste (34)
to Maemo 7 / Leste by biketool - 12 hrs, 37 mins ago
Maemo repository (5)
to Community by dredlok706 - 2 days, 7 hrs ago
Re-commissioning N9 in 2018 (127)
to MeeGo / Harmattan by smatkovi - 2 days, 10 hrs ago
Porting apps to Leste (41)
to Maemo 7 / Leste by Arno_11 - 3 days, 3 hrs ago
N900 is not recognizable on any of my devices (windows 10,7, xp) What can I do? (1)
to Nokia N900 by nieldk - 4 days, 16 hrs ago
more...

Page 9 of 40

Thread Tools

	woody14619	2012-06-21 , 19:38
	Posts: 1,455 \| Thanked: 3,309 times \| Joined on Dec 2009 @ Rochester, NY	#81

Originally Posted by Creamy Goodness

I read that but the 'criteria' doesn't mention anything about that, so for all I know you throw that submitted info in the trash.

Since it's part of the listed criteria right in the wiki page referenced, I have to call FUD on you. Sorry. And really, at this point, if you think we just collected all that and spend days pouring over it to whittle down the list, and countless hours discussing it just to discard it, then I'm done chatting with you anyway. :P

__________________
Maemo Council Member: May 2012 - November 2012
Hildon Foundation founding member.
Hildon Foundation Board of Directors: March 2013 - Jan 15, 2014

The Following User Says Thank You to woody14619 For This Useful Post:
Estel

	ZogG	2012-06-21 , 19:38
	Posts: 1,389 \| Thanked: 1,857 times \| Joined on Feb 2010 @ Israel	#82

I asked the certain question and i do not insult council, but still i feel i had to ask it, as i think community award is about community as a part of it i would like to know why decision is made to put 4 councils in the award. I think in proper country the government should stand responsible for their people, and if not, as in most countries =) than we are loosing it, and than the decision is not right, sorry for unclear explanation. I feel i have right for an answer at least.

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

	woody14619	2012-06-21 , 20:06
	Posts: 1,455 \| Thanked: 3,309 times \| Joined on Dec 2009 @ Rochester, NY	#83

Originally Posted by wolke

woody: things that are insulting that need to be said still need to be said; you cant have democracy without it

And I take no issue with that. But when someone says what you've said was insulting, don't deny it. To say one isn't demanding explanations when one, just posts before, did just that is silly.

There are better ways to say you disagree with some of the choices. And you can do so without insulting those who were awarded devices.

Originally Posted by wolke

my list of grievances for this contest:

1&2> The criteria was not selected by the Council. It was handed to us by Nokia with the criteria in place. If anything, Council added transparency by putting in place a submission mechanism and documenting those submissions. Do you think adding a "here's why we did/didn't choose this member" section would have caused less strife, arguing, and ill will?

3> Again, the criteria was that Council would decide, which was handed to us as part of the competition. How should it have been decided? Open discussion on an IRC channel? Do you think there was a way to do this publicly that would have lead to less argument, strife, and ill will? I'd love to hear it if you have a suggestion...

Actually, I'd love to hear it if you could go back in time and tell me before it started, since now it's a little late... The rules, criteria, and selection mechanism were all public and on the wiki well over a month ago.

For all the people that are now suddenly so concerned about it, nobody mentioned any issues until after the competition was over.

As for 4>, I will not comment on that other than to say for my own reasons I did not submit my name as an entrant.

Those fact that Council members were running though was again quite public. All submissions were public, and documented, and with the first entrant being a Council member, it's not like that concept was an unknown. There was even a Q/A session with Quim in an open, logged Community Council meeting about this very topic.

Complaining about your team losing the day after a tournament is all fine and good. But if you want to have an effect on the outcome, you needed to act a month ago. Complaining now would be like submitting an entry now and demanding we evaluate it against the current list. Pointless...

__________________
Maemo Council Member: May 2012 - November 2012
Hildon Foundation founding member.
Hildon Foundation Board of Directors: March 2013 - Jan 15, 2014

The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to woody14619 For This Useful Post:
Estel, Jaffa, jalyst, pelago, wolke

wolke	2012-06-21 , 20:18
Posts: 986 \| Thanked: 1,526 times \| Joined on Jul 2010	#84

Originally Posted by woody14619

1&2> The criteria was not selected by the Council. It was handed to us by Nokia with the criteria in place. If anything, Council added transparency by putting in place a submission mechanism and documenting those submissions. Do you think adding a "here's why we did/didn't choose this member" section would have caused less strife, arguing, and ill will?

oh, didnt know that. no i dont think it would have caused less strife or arguing, but it wouldnt call the council's impartiality into doubt.

Originally Posted by woody14619

3> Again, the criteria was that Council would decide, which was handed to us as part of the competition. How should it have been decided? Open discussion on an IRC channel? Do you think there was a way to do this publicly that would have lead to less argument, strife, and ill will? I'd love to hear it if you have a suggestion...

competitions with such high gains will always have ruffled feathers; i honestly dont think one way or the other would have had more complaining, since just as many would win, and just as many would lose.
i think that the most fair way to do it would have been to have the council accept a list of applicants, and have the final process done like the council election itself. {that went well, and it was democratic enough for me}.

Originally Posted by woody14619

Actually, I'd love to hear it if you could go back in time and tell me before it started, since now it's a little late... The rules, criteria, and selection mechanism were all public and on the wiki well over a month ago.
For all the people that are now suddenly so concerned about it, nobody mentioned any issues until after the competition was over.

what im asking for isnt for it to be magically fixed, but for the unfairness to be addressed publicly by the committe in some way that smoothes the ruffled feathers. {i wasnt on TMO nearly all last month for personal reasons}

Originally Posted by woody14619

As for 4>, I will not comment on that other than to say for my own reasons I did not submit my name as an entrant.

Those fact that Council members were running though was again quite public.

i dont think anyone on the council would want very much to take the device away from their fellow council-brethren; as a result, the council members stood a MUCH better chance of getting one than, say, itsnotabigtruck.

you are not free of the abuse of power; you were on the council that awarded itself 16% of the prize.

whether this is because of altruistic-but-misplaced human emotion, or still-very-human greed, its still unfair.

my central point is NOT how-come-such-and-such-didnt-get-one-theyre-great, its what can we do now to fix the quite obvious unfairness. its never too late to do whats right.

__________________
~ teleshoes ~

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to wolke For This Useful Post:
itsnotabigtruck, jalyst, ZogG

	woody14619	2012-06-21 , 20:23
	Posts: 1,455 \| Thanked: 3,309 times \| Joined on Dec 2009 @ Rochester, NY	#85

Originally Posted by ZogG

I asked the certain question

I understand your question, but feel I am not the right person to answer that. I can tell you that my votes were based on merit given the selection criteria and the applicants given. I did not consider the status of Council member (past or present) as part of that merit.

Again, as per other discussions, submissions were publicly documented in real time as they came in (thanks to Ivan mainly for that, as the wiki logs show). That included entries by Council, which were also brought up at a Council meeting in an open an publicly logged forum, and documented on the Council blog. Short of sending PMs of the minutes to everyone on TMO I'm not sure how things couldn't have been more open.

__________________
Maemo Council Member: May 2012 - November 2012
Hildon Foundation founding member.
Hildon Foundation Board of Directors: March 2013 - Jan 15, 2014

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to woody14619 For This Useful Post:
Estel, ZogG

Creamy Goodness	2012-06-21 , 20:25
Posts: 1,463 \| Thanked: 1,916 times \| Joined on Feb 2008 @ Edmonton, AB	#86

Originally Posted by woody14619

Since it's part of the listed criteria right in the wiki page referenced, I have to call FUD on you. Sorry. And really, at this point, if you think we just collected all that and spend days pouring over it to whittle down the list, and countless hours discussing it just to discard it, then I'm done chatting with you anyway. :P

I don't think that, I never suggested that is what happened. I'm just saying the Wiki isn't clear and leaves the possibility open. I would have guessed you guys discuss and vote but I shouldn't have to be guessing. I am pretty sure I'm allowed to complain that communication could be better when most of you are elected on a platform of openess and communication. Since I doubt you guys will give much detail on each winner, I would ask to know if you had a vote on each winner, and which council members took part in the discussion and voting.

__________________

Conky | Proximus | Overclocking

	sifo	2012-06-21 , 20:27
	Posts: 1,359 \| Thanked: 1,292 times \| Joined on Oct 2011 @ Tartus.Syria	#87

i dont know if all the CC members should take a device but what i know is freemangordon deserve one [even he dont like me but this is the truth]

and come on people it is just a couple of devices and who dont deserve his prize im sure it will be bricked between his hands

WITH MY RESPECT TO ALL !

./sifo

__________________
[ N900-Crack ] [ The Purge ] [ New Smiles ] [ New icons ] [ ? ]
" Hey ! I've just met you and this is crazy, so install cssu maybe ? "
Please help out keeping Maemo.org alive, and consider donating.
https://www.facebook.com/ZoRk7

	woody14619	2012-06-21 , 20:35
	Posts: 1,455 \| Thanked: 3,309 times \| Joined on Dec 2009 @ Rochester, NY	#88

Originally Posted by wolke

oh, didnt know that.

It's unbelievably refreshing to hear someone say that out loud and with sincerity. Thank you.

Originally Posted by wolke

i honestly dont think one way or the other would have had more complaining, since just as many would win, and just as many would lose.

Which is why I didn't object to the process myself. All alternatives would lead to someone whining. I chose the one that would be least demeaning to both the winners and runners-up (because nobody here was a loser, in any respect).

Originally Posted by wolke

i think that the most fair way to do it would have been to have the council accept a list of applicants, and have the final process done like the council election itself.

Even after the Coucil election, there was bitterness. Complaints about the "size of communities" and not having accurate representation by all devices... Again, the selection criteria was given to us, not self-chosen. CA was not to be a popularity contest, and I feel for the most part we were able to prevent that.

Originally Posted by wolke

i dont think anyone on the council would want very much to take the device away from their fellow council-brethren; as a result, the council members stood a MUCH better chance of getting one than, say, itsnotabigtruck

Again, I note that I was not a participant, and my choices were based on merit. And frankly, given the nature of personalities in Council, and some recent conflict there-in, I can tell you that your assumption in this case is not at all true.

This is not the first time this week I've been called blunt.

__________________
Maemo Council Member: May 2012 - November 2012
Hildon Foundation founding member.
Hildon Foundation Board of Directors: March 2013 - Jan 15, 2014

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to woody14619 For This Useful Post:
Estel, jalyst

freemangordon	2012-06-21 , 20:41
Posts: 3,074 \| Thanked: 12,964 times \| Joined on Mar 2010 @ Sofia,Bulgaria	#89

@Arie: I really wonder where did all your posts on "It's official: maemo.org to be orphaned" thread go. Especially the one you were stating you're done with your N9. You were running for the council, aren't you? I really feel sorry for not quoting that post.

__________________
Never fear. I is here.

720p video support on N900,SmartReflex on N900,Keyboard and mouse support on N900
Nothing is impossible - Stable thumb2 on n900

Community SSU developer
kernel-power developer and maintainer

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to freemangordon For This Useful Post:
Estel, sjordet

	ZogG	2012-06-21 , 20:41
	Posts: 1,389 \| Thanked: 1,857 times \| Joined on Feb 2010 @ Israel	#90

Originally Posted by woody14619

I understand your question, but feel I am not the right person to answer that. I can tell you that my votes were based on merit given the selection criteria and the applicants given. I did not consider the status of Council member (past or present) as part of that merit.

Again, as per other discussions, submissions were publicly documented in real time as they came in (thanks to Ivan mainly for that, as the wiki logs show). That included entries by Council, which were also brought up at a Council meeting in an open an publicly logged forum, and documented on the Council blog. Short of sending PMs of the minutes to everyone on TMO I'm not sure how things couldn't have been more open.

The problem is that i never followed or checked someone and as it was self submission, i never checked all names of self nomination and i would never thought that they would nominate themself, so i simply found out only after the winning list.

Last edited by ZogG; 2012-06-21 at 20:46.