Active Topics

 


Closed Thread
Thread Tools
Posts: 1,539 | Thanked: 1,604 times | Joined on Oct 2011 @ With my N9
#171
Originally Posted by ivgalvez View Post
It took a lot of time to go through all this nonsense and bitterness. Time we need for more important stuff.

Arie: all this distinctions you are making about the "Harmattan" community and naming yourself as their representative is pretty sad.

I don't want to enter into this game of FUD and childish arguments.

The fact is that the Community Awards criteria and selection process have been publicly discussed for weeks before the submissions start, both at TMO and mailing list and no one has expressed any concern about it except, precisely, the members of the Council.

Two options were proposed, first one that applying members of the Council wouldn't get any involvement in CA decision, leaving Woody as only judge (we questioned Quim if he wanted to be part of jury but he declined). Second option was that Councillors wouldn't vote for themselves but will help in organizing and selecting the rest of candidates.

Second option was chosen. I can presume Arie would have protested also on first one saying that only one person deciding was dictatorial.

Regarding the voting process, I can say that at first round only 16 people were selected as winners and that 2 of 4 Councillors applying didn't enter that list. Even more, it was needed to go to final round of voting and agreement to include the fourth candidate into the winners list.

It's absolutely understandable that anyone could prefer any other candidates to some of the selected ones. Precisely, we had different opinions on who deserved the prizes, but at the end, we have reached consensus and this Council is going to speak with one voice, so we won't publish our preferences or personal votes on candidates.
No, no, I would have supported Woody being the only judge. That I would have preferred, because he didn't get a device himself.
__________________
Arie|www.everythingn9.com|Nokia N9 64GB x2|Nokia N950

@everythingn9

Temporary Inception Fix


Times Banned from TMO: 4
 

The Following User Says Thank You to Arie For This Useful Post:
ZogG's Avatar
Posts: 1,389 | Thanked: 1,857 times | Joined on Feb 2010 @ Israel
#172
Originally Posted by nicolai View Post
All those people complaining about the judging process:
You are to late! You should have raised your hand weeks ago.

You all did know that the council members would decide about the
community award and you all know that there were council members
running for it.

What's the point in waiting after the final decisions was made?

Originally Posted by lma View Post
Wouldn't it be be better if council members just stepped aside for their own award nomination, but the entire council decided the rest?
Originally Posted by Estel View Post
@lma
Sounds reasonable. We'll discuss this in next council meeting - completely stepping down (of submitting Councilors) from deciding was a way for maintaining transparency, but Your idea sounds like better option.

/Estel
Originally Posted by geneven View Post
I (really) hate to say this, but the right way to handle this is for the whole council to be ineligible. Oh well, what's wrong with making your first important act in office distributing booty to a fellow member of the Power Elite? Never Mind...

Originally Posted by Estel View Post
@geneven
Well, being ineligible was my my first proposition, even before election - at the correct place, where such serious things are discussed with reasonable people, i.e. mailing list.

To my pleasant surprise, 100% of feedback was like "there is no problem with councilor applying for device", and even few voices like "Councilors should receive devices by default, as without mentioned past contributions, they wouldn't be elected".

After all, there was 100% consensus, that submissions by Councilors are OK, and submitting Councilor should just step down from deciding about his own submissions. I've also asked qgil, and he haven't presented any objections.
---

But, *of course*, it was predictable, that someone is going to create mini-dramas about it on TMO Judging by Your comments for past few weeks/months, it seems, that You feel quite comfortable in trollish such shoes?

@Dave999
I don't know who deleted your post, but whoever did it, had much rationale to do so - You've not, apparently, spared 30 seconds to read about rules for submissions. BTW, congratulations on self-thanks, whichever way You achieved it

/Estel

I liked how people that do not use maillist are not reasonable? Or reasonable it's what suites you more?
I like how it was predicted that it would be dramas, but still continued. And how one of the persons was called troll...


Still if council wanted device they should step aside as council. Few of them might deserve it, but 4 of 4 getting and judging still wouldn't make happy.
 

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ZogG For This Useful Post:
Posts: 1,539 | Thanked: 1,604 times | Joined on Oct 2011 @ With my N9
#173
Originally Posted by SD69 View Post
Hello,

It is unfortunate there is so much concern at this point.

When it was announced that community awards would be self-nominations only (I expressed my opinion that the awards also allow nominations of others but that option was decided against), I volunteered to step aside from the judging process.

http://talk.maemo.org/showpost.php?p...2&postcount=20

AFAIK, no one asked me to step aside. I also repeated this to remaining council after that, and there was no request to step aside.

I believe I would have received an award even if I had not participated in the decision making (recall that several people on Council had nominated me for council). So I don't think I personally benefited from my participation, and I do think the selection process was improved because of my participation.

This is the first free maemo device that I have ever received despite much community service. Several people requested, and were awarded, devices who already had one free device and I would rather that the process hadn't allow for that. We even got requests from people who received a free device, broken it, and were asking for another. And requests for an N9 from people who already had an N950. I have neither. We got requests from people who were obviously being greedy or who had walked away from the community or who otherwise clearly didn't deserve it. And some people didn't request a device who I thought could have rightfully done so. Trying to be as objective as I can, I do not think my award should be controversial.

Also, if Quim Gil or other Nokia representative had decided these awards, they almost certainly would have automatically included all of Council. In the early years, council automatically received free sponsorships to maemo conferences and free devices. This time was a bit different because the process was more transparent and everyone had to apply in public. I think the transparent process meant there was one device available that normally would not have been.

These devices were for community service, and so those who are not developers were intentionally not at a disadvantage, for the first time that I recall. And yes the awards were for contributions over the last couple years, so for example people who were only active in harmattan development over the last six months didn't meet the time criteria. There also seems to be a desire to award any and all harmattan development, but these were maemo.org community awards, and did not consider contributions made at other places, including our valued colleagues at Mer/Nemo.

It is unfortunate that several deserving people mentioned in this thread did not receive a device. Council spent a lot of time making the decisions. I want to congratulate the winners and thank you for your service. I hope that everyone will continue to support our efforts.
Rob, if anyone questions you getting a device, they are clearly a fool.

Congratulations to all the winners, though I am still not aware who you are, I am sure you are more than deserving of these devices.

Thank you for your efforts towards and for the community.
__________________
Arie|www.everythingn9.com|Nokia N9 64GB x2|Nokia N950

@everythingn9

Temporary Inception Fix


Times Banned from TMO: 4
 

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Arie For This Useful Post:
Posts: 1,397 | Thanked: 2,126 times | Joined on Nov 2009 @ Dublin, Ireland
#174
Felipe Crochick has decided to move his award to the Coding Competition. In his own words:

"I would to suggest it to be a prize for the best maemo/n900 application so we may see more of those."
 

The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to ivgalvez For This Useful Post:
Posts: 395 | Thanked: 255 times | Joined on Nov 2010
#175
Originally Posted by ivgalvez View Post
Felipe Crochick has decided to move his award to the Coding Competition. In his own words:

"I would to suggest it to be a prize for the best maemo/n900 application so we may see more of those."
Suggest ≠ move his award (just kidding).

Anyway, if i give the idea for the best app, he give me his award? (kidding again or not?)

Greetings.
 
marxian's Avatar
Posts: 2,448 | Thanked: 9,523 times | Joined on Aug 2010 @ Wigan, UK
#176
Originally Posted by nicolai View Post
All those people complaining about the judging process:
You are to late! You should have raised your hand weeks ago.

You all did know that the council members would decide about the
community award and you all know that there were council members
running for it.

What's the point in waiting after the final decisions was made?
It really should not need to be pointed out by the community that it is inappropriate for the judges of a competition to also participate in it. This is common sense. It should be clear to anyone that this type of outcome would give the impression of 'snouts in the trough'. Woody made the right decision not to participate on the grounds of a conflict of interest. The others should have done the same.
__________________
'Men of high position are allowed, by a special act of grace, to accomodate their reasoning to the answer they need. Logic is only required in those of lesser rank.' - J K Galbraith

My website

GitHub
 

The Following 14 Users Say Thank You to marxian For This Useful Post:
Banned | Posts: 3,412 | Thanked: 1,043 times | Joined on Feb 2010
#177
Originally Posted by marxian View Post
It really should not need to be pointed out by the community that it is inappropriate for the judges of a competition to also participate in it. This is common sense. It should be clear to anyone that this type of outcome would give the impression of 'snouts in the trough'. Woody made the right decision not to participate on the grounds of a conflict of interest. The others should have done the same.
I am so happy that YOU have had the guts to say something because i am wondering just what this community is made of now.

PS i am watching the number of thanks you get and who gives them to you because i tell you if there was ever a time something is wrong this is it and this council must do something to put it right or stand down it is as simple as this because it just stinks to high heaven what has happened, ALSO everyone in agreement with the current council are dividing this community for sure 1000%.

Times have changed on here for sure !!!!.

Last edited by abill_uk; 2012-06-22 at 17:48.
 
nicolai's Avatar
Posts: 1,637 | Thanked: 4,424 times | Joined on Apr 2009 @ Germany
#178
Originally Posted by marxian View Post
It really should not need to be pointed out by the community that it is inappropriate for the judges of a competition to also participate in it.
I agree and I think it wasn't a good idea from the council
members.
Anyway, if someone cares about it,
there were enough time to point this out. Why now?
 

The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to nicolai For This Useful Post:
Posts: 245 | Thanked: 915 times | Joined on Feb 2012
#179
Originally Posted by SD69 View Post
It is unfortunate there is so much concern at this point.
Quite.

Originally Posted by ivgalvez View Post
The fact is that the Community Awards criteria and selection process have been publicly discussed for weeks before the submissions start, both at TMO and mailing list and no one has expressed any concern about it except, precisely, the members of the Council. ... Second option was chosen.
What occurred was a little-publicized adjustment of the rules that allowed you to claim the awards for yourselves. This adjustment didn't occur until after submissions started, and after everyone's eyes were turned to other matters. abill_uk is right on the dot: no one would have stood for this were it apparent this would be the outcome.

Originally Posted by SD69 View Post
This is the first free maemo device that I have ever received despite much community service. Several people requested, and were awarded, devices who already had one free device and I would rather that the process hadn't allow for that. We even got requests from people who received a free device, broken it, and were asking for another.
Numerous other individuals hadn't received devices either - individuals who have made substantial actual contributions. Those individuals, such as e-yes, weren't awarded anything, because the council preferred to dispense the awards to itself.

-

This situation is the essence of a conflict of interest, and the only acceptable solution at this point is for the awards to the councilors, at the very minimum, to be cancelled. Anything else is to render the whole matter a farce. I don't understand how anyone on this forum could find it reasonable to allow the judges of a competition, one intended to acknowledge valuable contributions to Maemo (including Harmattan), to loot it for their own personal gain.

Everyone needs to make it clear that this doesn't fly, no matter how minor the prizes are.

Originally Posted by Chuck Norris View Post
Can we move on? I think all have made their points clear so why not just move to other threads or go and play with your favorite toy. (Whatever that is)
Not until a mitigation is put into place. This is a public matter, and it needs to be publically addressed.
 

The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to itsnotabigtruck For This Useful Post:
Moderator | Posts: 6,215 | Thanked: 6,400 times | Joined on Nov 2011
#180
its not everyday you see a respected member of the community agree with abill_uk...the Council have unfortunately been wrong in their judgement here...

i'm not an old member of this forum but the basic premise should always apply that a judge should never be a contestant too and while the Council has some valid points, for the sake of the Community (along with the Council's credibility) I think the process needs to be re-done or some devices be re-allocated.
 

The Following User Says Thank You to thedead1440 For This Useful Post:
Closed Thread

Tags
award, community, council, device, outcry


 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 22:48.