I always preferred

Hah.. haven't heard that one. We're going to have to agree to disagree there then.. hopefully at some point this comes to a vote about how to handle these things and we'll see which of our sides is more advocated.

Personally, I do love transparency. I really do... but what I don't love is throwing people to the wolves. That doesn't sit well with me.. which unfortunately means we can't have 100% transparency. Some things are best handled on their own.. IMHO.

To quote a fun movie:

Maybe I can offer something to this thread, simply and without any large scale thinking or weighed morals.


Hi, I'm an end user with an N900. I have disposable income and would like to purchase your game when it is completed. I want it to work well without bugs, so I can show it to my girlfriend, and possibly entertain her while we're riding the metro or something.

I don't want to be scammed, so I would prefer to use Paypal or a service that I know, I would consider OVI as an acceptable payment system, just because it seems to be backed by Nokia.

I don't like it when my demo games open up payment web pages, if I like it, I will buy it.

I do want to buy something from an N900 store, because I really like the N900 and want it to do well.

Thank you.

Heh. There's certainly something to that, but there is the counterexample that open transparent communities do actually manage to generate things like Linux distributions. I tend to find that when you create an atmosphere in which people are treated like responsible grown-ups, and everyone simply expects everyone else to act that way, most people do.

That's not to say that there aren't messy, and even painful, disputes on occasion, but overall it works.

Open discussions are (almost) always good, when everyone involved brings maturity and are accountable to their actions and their messages.

Unfortunately, as can be seen in many threads here, that's not always the case. Such is the achilles heel of having 'serious' discussion in an open forum like this.

Well...

I need an example of a successful Linux Distribution that does not have a central group of individuals primarily responsible for it's development.

Sure.. quite of a few of them take input from the community on direction.. but I don't think there's any where absolutely every change is voted on by every member of the community before implementation...

yes, why didn't you spot the abuse first, contact necessary persons and handle this with closed doors? or even better: predict such an abuse and prevent it technically.

it is so easy to say idealistic things afterwards ... it has already happened so absolutely no need to talk in past form. what about lines like "in future there should ...."?
imo it is dozen times stupider to blame peoples initial reactions afterwards than expressing such.

this was the first time. bratag misses the point by miles. we have open ecosystem so we need the trust in order to make things run fluently. sio2interactive was the first one who did something that totally took the trust away with communitys repos. and I got the image that the guy said "sorry, but I'd still do it agan because blahblah". that is something I find unacceptable and haven't changed my harsh opinion even after serious thinking.

everyone should have done better. this applies to everyone in this thread. i suggest we spend rest of the thread stoning the people who stick in the past instead of discussing about improvements.



should there be a bolded point in garage when creating new account? something like "one account per one real person (no one per company etc). creating multiple accounts will lead to removing of all accounts and software etc accordingly plus permanent ban for life"

that would make the risk so big that reward from taking the risk would need to be huge, much more than getting one piece of software to extras.

Have you been reading any of my responses??? That is exactly what I have been doing.

Please look specifically at what I responded to.. he was saying he wanted a public apology due to broken trust. I am saying it would be unnecessary if it's handled privately. Which implies precisely that I am recommending for the future that be how this is done.

Little harsh. However some form of notice about "One account per person" or something would be a good idea.

What a bunch of witch hunters.

He did the wrong doing, he then admitted that he was wrong with some very valid reasons which should be addressed so it doesn't happen again in the future, and then apologised, then he was willing to support this community with more games. He has been already burnt by you all more than enough.

But nooooooo.

Is this how a justice system works these days?

Kill first, forgive later?

I hate people who publicly humiliating and judging others as if they've never done something wrong in their lives. It's EASY to say bad things to someone else who you know you will never meet personally. I thought maemo.org community was a bit more grown up than this. Guess it's not.

Welcome to 5 or so pages ago Jakiman.. the focus now is what to do in the future.. not what's been already done.