[Council] Community Awards: final results - Page 16 - maemo.org

Active Topics

Maemo repository (5)
to Community by dredlok706 - 9 hrs, 55 mins ago
Re-commissioning N9 in 2018 (127)
to MeeGo / Harmattan by smatkovi - 12 hrs, 33 mins ago
Porting apps to Leste (41)
to Maemo 7 / Leste by Arno_11 - 1 day, 6 hrs ago
List of well performing apps on Leste (33)
to Maemo 7 / Leste by teroyk - 1 day, 14 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 - 2 days, 18 hrs ago
Error after installing Leste on sdcard (13)
to Maemo 7 / Leste by Maemish - 5 days, 21 hrs ago
TLS 1.2 for N9 is ready (29)
to MeeGo / Harmattan by smatkovi - 6 days, 6 hrs ago
more...

Page 16 of 40

Thread Tools

don.edri	2012-06-22 , 10:16
Posts: 138 \| Thanked: 152 times \| Joined on Jun 2012 @ Switzerland/Zurich	#151

Hi to all. I'm a very new member of this forum and not in any position to comment on whether somebody deserved / not deserved a device, and I don't intend to. However, I think there's one point that's universal and can be made anyhow:

Being a judge in your own cause will always be perceived, at best, as walking on a thin ice, whether the decisions made are just or not.

If, as some claim here, the council members deserve a device due to their function, the rewards should be provided separately to the Community Awards programme - if the community supports that. Just one idea for the future I guess, as everything already happened and can not be undone.

So keep calm and keep waiting for pr 1.3 - which, if comes any day soon, could sweeten the bitterness of this thread

Last edited by don.edri; 2012-06-22 at 10:24.

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to don.edri For This Useful Post:
ibrakalifa, ZogG

ivgalvez	2012-06-22 , 10:16
Posts: 1,397 \| Thanked: 2,126 times \| Joined on Nov 2009 @ Dublin, Ireland	#152

Originally Posted by ZogG

Nice way to post an answer with no actual answer. I hate politics.

I'll try to answer explicitly to your questions. Above post was intentionally more generic.

Originally Posted by ZogG

So what you are saying that there are people in list that didn't worth winning and were left spots left and only than you put the council members there? oe i misunderstood?

Absolutely not. In a first round of votes, personally made by each member of the Council, it's normal that we didn't agree 100%. So we needed more rounds of voting, revisions on each candidate's merits and finally, reach a consensus.

Originally Posted by ZogG

Or it took you several rounds to figure it out how all the councils will get into list?

That's rude and unnecessary.

Originally Posted by ZogG

And yes i want to ask council as members, as you see council can't speak as one man, as even here different decisions were made, and i think woody can't answer instead of those who put their names there.

We decided not to publish individual votes or details of discussion to avoid hurting those that didn't get a device and trying to avoid all these kind of nonsense arguments,

Originally Posted by ZogG

And back again, we can't follow all discussions and decision, i simply didn't check if councils in list, coz i didn't even think of that possibility and i did relied on you to make it right, but what can i say — always learn something new.

I don't know what is your level of involvement in the community. Of course it's difficult to know everything said on mailing list, IRC and TMO.

Originally Posted by ZogG

And yes, you are not real corrupted government, but council for community, and i think it's in your responsibility to answer doubts of members, especially when there are more than few and when topic is hot like that, otherwise what's the point of representing us?

I hope I have answered to your questions. Let me know if you want to know anything else.

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

	ZogG	2012-06-22 , 10:24
	Posts: 1,389 \| Thanked: 1,857 times \| Joined on Feb 2010 @ Israel	#153

The question is simple, how ethic it was to put your names in list while you were judges and not only to put but all judges got the device, except the one who wasn't involved. I still can't see the straight answer to "It's not right to judge and put your names in award list at the same time"

The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to ZogG For This Useful Post:
abill_uk, don.edri, sifo, Sourav.dubey

ivgalvez	2012-06-22 , 10:32
Posts: 1,397 \| Thanked: 2,126 times \| Joined on Nov 2009 @ Dublin, Ireland	#154

Originally Posted by ZogG

The question is simple, how ethic it was to put your names in list while you were judges and not only to put but all judges got the device, except the one who wasn't involved. I still can't see the straight answer to "It's not right to judge and put your names in award list at the same time"

That concern was raised during the constitution of the Community Awards, precisely by other councillors such as Estel (see previous logs provided by Woody) and SD69. Nobody else, outside the Council, even took the time to give their opinions about it.

As I have already explained 2 posts above, the other possibility (being out of decision about other candidates and Woody being the only judge) was also proposed and finally discarded. Again, no one else even bothered to comment.

And finally, submissions of councillors were publicly made through mailing list and, nobody commented!!

I'm sorry if you didn't notice during the two or three weeks of discussion around the CA or during the three weeks of collecting submissions. Your concerns are perfectly valid but you should have raised them before.

The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to ivgalvez For This Useful Post:
Estel, jalyst, pelago, Wonko

	ZogG	2012-06-22 , 10:43
	Posts: 1,389 \| Thanked: 1,857 times \| Joined on Feb 2010 @ Israel	#155

Originally Posted by ivgalvez

That concern was raised during the constitution of the Community Awards, precisely by other councillors such as Estel (see previous logs provided by Woody) and SD69. Nobody else, outside the Council, even took the time to give their opinions about it.

As I have already explained 2 posts above, the other possibility (being out of decision about other candidates and Woody being the only judge) was also proposed and finally discarded. Again, no one else even bothered to comment.

And finally, submissions of councillors were publicly made through mailing list and, nobody commented!!

I'm sorry if you didn't notice during the two or three weeks of discussion around the CA or during the three weeks of collecting submissions. Your concerns are perfectly valid but you should have raised them before.

Ok, once again the same answers i answered to:
1) as it was self submitting i didn't check all members, as i have life
2) i didn't check all the data about it on TMO as it was said not to use thread but just self submit on maillist. And i didn't think you would do such a thing
3)I read about you asking Quim, but you know you are council with responsibility and power and i don't think you should ask those things, otherwise what's the point of your existence, those things should be handled by you or community, i'm pretty sure he just didn't want to be involved that much (i might be wrong)
4) I STILL DO NOT SEE why after it was hard to decide how to vote with you on list there was no option — NOT TO PARTICIPATE, is it that free device is stronger than council responsibility ?

The Following User Says Thank You to ZogG For This Useful Post:
Sourav.dubey

lma	2012-06-22 , 10:48
Posts: 2,802 \| Thanked: 4,491 times \| Joined on Nov 2007	#156

Originally Posted by Dousan

So you're saying that they only give harmattan any atention and interest if provided with an harmattan device.

You can't force anyone to be interested in anything. But I see mostly newbies getting upset with this, and I'm pointing out that what they express would actually work against them.

In that case they shouldn't have been elected to council.

They were elected, not appointed. The community clearly wants these 5 people to represent them, period. There can be no "shouldn't have been elected" for whatever reason. If you don't like it, simply vote for someone else next time, or even run yourself.

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

vi_	2012-06-22 , 10:50
Posts: 1,680 \| Thanked: 3,685 times \| Joined on Jan 2011	#157

1. Councilors where voted in BEFORE the announcement of the CA. This implies they joined to help steer the community as oppose to rig the CA.

2. The rules were laid out for about 1 month before the judging took place. Everyone had time to complain. IRC was on fire for about a week with angry discussions.

3. The councilors have already proven themselves to be Maemo obsessed nuts with a reputable background, this alone makes a very compelling reason for them to be winning a CA. Biased? Probably, however YOU ALL already chose them as the the Maemo community champions.

4. While you may brand some of the names on the list as trolls, nobodies and Harmattan dissenters, they fulfilled the criteria required to win. That is keeping maemo.org alive.

5. This was quite specifically NOT a coding competition, it was not a popularity contest and it certainly was not a developers device program.

6. To win you had to be a person that has helped nurture the community. This possibly includes (but not limited to); Helping on TMO, hanging out on IRC, providing actual USEFUL bug reports/feedback, solving problems, maintaining the wiki, generally greasing the wheels of Maemo.org.

Do not forget that this batch of loot is a very small fraction of the prizes. Most of it is going to the 3 coding competitions in which EVERYONE will be able to vote.

__________________

N900: One of God's own prototypes. A high-powered mutant of some kind never even considered for mass production. Too weird to live, and too rare to die.

Last edited by chemist; 2012-06-25 at 08:39. Reason: no bonus!

The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to vi_ For This Useful Post:
Estel, freemangordon, Hurrian, mrsellout, P@t, pelago, qwazix, sjordet, Wonko, woody14619

ivgalvez	2012-06-22 , 10:52
Posts: 1,397 \| Thanked: 2,126 times \| Joined on Nov 2009 @ Dublin, Ireland	#158

Originally Posted by ZogG

Ok, once again the same answers i answered to:
1) as it was self submitting i didn't check all members, as i have life
2) i didn't check all the data about it on TMO as it was said not to use thread but just self submit on maillist. And i didn't think you would do such a thing
3)I read about you asking Quim, but you know you are council with responsibility and power and i don't think you should ask those things, otherwise what's the point of your existence, those things should be handled by you or community, i'm pretty sure he just didn't want to be involved that much (i might be wrong)
4) I STILL DO NOT SEE why after it was hard to decide how to vote with you on list there was no option — NOT TO PARTICIPATE, is it that free device is stronger than council responsibility ?

You have made your disagreement clear, which I respect. I won't continue commenting at this point unless you have new questions.

Last edited by ivgalvez; 2012-06-22 at 11:01.

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

	ZogG	2012-06-22 , 10:57
	Posts: 1,389 \| Thanked: 1,857 times \| Joined on Feb 2010 @ Israel	#159

Is vote for leaving those devices for you or giving to others is option?

Wonko	2012-06-22 , 11:00
Posts: 456 \| Thanked: 1,580 times \| Joined on Dec 2009	#160

Originally Posted by ZogG

Can you please show me where it was discussed if council members should participate in award as well, before we just start arguing, as i just tried to say my point of view and you answered and i tried to explain that my point was different from answer i got, but i got the same answer again, so we are going in circles.