How on earth you and fremantle are seeing this like that? You have really flexible morale or some twisted logic going on. Or are you just trolling and not really even trying to understand what we are talking here?

Um; "Don't" I would imagine? That rather seems to go without saying. In any community that has rules, it's pretty much a given that you're not supposed to ignore or circumvent them just because you can.

Yet. They'll get it fixed, and even if they don't that's between Nokia and their customers; maemo.org bears no responsibility for that.

this thread turned into a witchhunt thats why..the mods could easily edit nearly all replies except from him and the officials on here.leaving it a bit more civalised

So what is the penalty?

It has already happened and a discussion took place already about it.

Now what? You want to ban him off the system indefinitely? On what basis?

What he did - wrong (though technically it should never have been able to happen in the first place if the correct security had been in place)

WHY he did it - entirely Nokia's fault. The piss poor excuse for a market MONTHS after the device has been released is a continuing source of embarrassment.

I bought both the games. Not because I think they are amazing games (though they are quite fun in short breaks) But because I believe commercial interest is required in order to make this platform (and the new MeeGo platform) successful.

Ask yourself - how long have we been waiting for Sygic's navigation software, which we know to be ready, to be released, the underlying reason for the delay continues to be a lack of a distribution process through Nokia.

It is a sad state of affairs and the people who pay the price are not Nokia, but the developers and end users. Perhaps we should be directing our ire at them rather than all this vitriol at a dev.

PS: Its interesting to note that some of the most vehement callers for his head are also some of the largest whiners about this platform and phone.

So what if he had paid all his fortune for Nokia's "coming soon" store. Why on earth that would make any justifications for his actions? I do not care if he is Dalai Lama or superman. Good deeds, being nice, giving to community, losing your family or any other misfortune do not give person any special level. Everyone is on same level. There is no some karma level that where you can subtract after doing something like this.

.edit
oh. That might be bit harsh. But i´m just trying to point out that behaviour like this is highly unacceptable and whether or not you are basically trying to do good. I´m really a person who accepts apologies but i hate people who do not take this kinds of matter really seriously.

I dont' have time to read through this whole thread right now but please visit the thread about the broken testing implementation and consider voicing your opinions about the need for an official testers group (should you feel this case is an example of why that should be implemented as described in wiki). That one change to the current process would both expedite and improve it by making this kind of thing impossible, while not making a "popular vote" approach to testing useless as an assurance of QA.

I will unsticky the SiO2 interactive thread in Games. This is not acceptable behavior.

Edit: and holy cow, reading the last few posts makes me wonder if i should lock the thread. Per Reggie's hands-off approach, it's only for extreme cases and I don't have time to verify it for the moment so if you feel it should receive more moderator attention please use the report post feature.

Edit2: Thread moved to community.

Edit3: Ok, i read most of the posts and this is fair discussion about an issue very relevant to the community. No locking seems warranted, and i still feel good about unstickying the publisher's "Courtesty thread" in Games. As has been stated, this is a simple case of someone not playing nice with the privileges granted and to continue to give privileged status to a person who shows no respect for the rules in place would be silly. I don't like the testing process myself (vis the thread i link above) but if everyone circumvents established safeguards just because they don't agree with them, there can be no organization; if they don't abide the community procedures there can be no community. Your right to swing your fist ends where it reaches my nose, etc...

I make no statement on whether i think the invitation (and yes, it is an invitation: not a right) to upload packages to Extras should be revoked. IMO that's a decision for the council based on their careful consideration.

Nokia will pay the price when customers loose trust in their products and abandon it. They're trading on a name.

apologies for the off topic

Ok - so you are a dev, you have a product ready to go to market. As we all know first to market is key in any new platform. You pay your money to use the "store" only to find that despite taking your money - they wont take your app. You then discover that there is a community supported repository where your app will get exposure, but in order to get into it you need 10 approvals, apps can and have been waiting months to get those approvals. Keeping in mind, to the best of my knowledge, there is to be no vetting process by Nokia for apps in the store - even if it was to be functioning correctly. So you find a way to approve your own app - not even bothering to really hide the fact, but not pointing it out either.

Perhaps not the most transparent of actions, but not warranting the rabid response of the moral police either.

Oh and in response to your earlier statement about living a place where you can leave your wallet etc unattended. I would very much like to know where that is - I have lived in 5 countries on 3 continents and in none of them would I have left my wallet alone for even 30 seconds

I don't know. It's not an easy question, but it's clearly one that needs to be answered, hence the suggestion of getting a view from the Community Council.

That's a possibility. The arguments for that seem fairly straightforward:
- He can't be trusted, and untrustworthy software should be kept out of the maemo.org repositories for the good on maemo.org
- There needs to be a clear penalty otherwise we're just inviting similar abuses in future.

I think it probably would be better all round if we could find a way back from this, but it's hard to see how that can happen until or unless SIO2 appears to recognise the wrongness of their actions, and I don't think they really do. I don't think it would be a good idea to let it slide with no action at all though - the maemo.org project and repositories have a (deserved) reputation for shipping good quality, properly QA-ed packages, and that will go away if maemo.org is seen to condone packagers circumventing the mechanisms that are set up to achieve that.