Proposal to remove the 'Paid support' list
The subject is self-explanatory. But I'll try to explain my position a bit further. The project doesn't have a partner program, so being listed there only means you are listed. What is the benefit for people listed? I would say marketing and/or some SEO advantage (Liz told me there are counter measures applied so it is not used for SEO). Some places, notably India and others, expect some kind of official certification for service providers, and people are referring to being listed on the site as a way to certify their validation as service providers. I think this hurts the project, because people tend to trust some quality degree is assured if companies are listed, which we cannot certify; and also makes community members spend a lot of time reviewing people's sites, with try/error iterations very often [1]. I propose we replace the current listing with (a) nothing or (b) some pie diagram with companies/institutions contributions (git log, or what best addresses the need) to the project. I would vote (a). If there is some consensus that contributing companies/institutions should have some public recognition by the community, then we can do (b). How companies position themselves on the market is not something the community needs to address, but the company's challenge. [2] Kind regards Tomas [1] I'm pretty sure we can write a script that generates different valid sites that should be accepted for the list, so I find depressing that people doesn't even do the effort to comply with the simple rules we have put. [2] Unless we start an official partner program, but I'm sure we are still far from that. If you want to actually be part of the Koha community and be recognized, do something for the project, write a valuable article for the newsletter, contribute an enhancement, actively report and/or fix bugs, organize Koha promoting events: Get involved. -- Tomás Cohen Arazi Theke Solutions ✆ +54 9351 3513384 GPG: B76C 6E7C 2D80 551A C765 E225 0A27 2EA1 B2F3 C15F
I have mixed feelings on the subject, but I think there is some merit in somebody maintaining a list somewhere. As now, it should not be any type of certification by the Koha community or a partner program, but for non-users researching Koha, a link to a list would be quite helpful, and better than relying on Google (which promotes paid listings). I just googled "koha" and the first item on the list? koha.org. A pie diagram unfairly penalizes smaller companies, perhaps with only a few individuals who could still provide excellent installation and support services, but don't have the staff to have 1,000 commits. While I realize I have left dangling "somebody maintaining a list somewhere", a list of Koha providers associated with the broad Koha community has value. Greg ------------------------------------ On 07/01/2015 09:06 AM, Tomas Cohen Arazi wrote:
The subject is self-explanatory. But I'll try to explain my position a bit further.
The project doesn't have a partner program, so being listed there only means you are listed.
What is the benefit for people listed? I would say marketing and/or some SEO advantage (Liz told me there are counter measures applied so it is not used for SEO). Some places, notably India and others, expect some kind of official certification for service providers, and people are referring to being listed on the site as a way to certify their validation as service providers.
I think this hurts the project, because people tend to trust some quality degree is assured if companies are listed, which we cannot certify; and also makes community members spend a lot of time reviewing people's sites, with try/error iterations very often [1].
I propose we replace the current listing with (a) nothing or (b) some pie diagram with companies/institutions contributions (git log, or what best addresses the need) to the project.
I would vote (a). If there is some consensus that contributing companies/institutions should have some public recognition by the community, then we can do (b). How companies position themselves on the market is not something the community needs to address, but the company's challenge. [2]
Kind regards Tomas
[1] I'm pretty sure we can write a script that generates different valid sites that should be accepted for the list, so I find depressing that people doesn't even do the effort to comply with the simple rules we have put. [2] Unless we start an official partner program, but I'm sure we are still far from that. If you want to actually be part of the Koha community and be recognized, do something for the project, write a valuable article for the newsletter, contribute an enhancement, actively report and/or fix bugs, organize Koha promoting events: Get involved.
Tomas Cohen Arazi schrieb am 01.07.2015
What is the benefit for people listed? I would say marketing and/or some SEO advantage (Liz told me there are counter measures applied so it is not used for SEO).
A place to send libraries to that are looking for support. A place for (at best community-active) support providers to be found without spending time on marketing. Apparently that does not work for some parts of the world, where the market appears to be huge but people contributing are very few in comparison. […]
people are referring to being listed on the site as a way to certify their validation as service providers.
I think this hurts the project, because people tend to trust some quality degree is assured if companies are listed, which we cannot certify; and also makes community members spend a lot of time reviewing people's sites, with try/error iterations very often [1].
Agreed, this has to stop.
I propose we replace the current listing with (a) nothing or (b) some pie diagram with companies/institutions contributions (git log, or what best addresses the need) to the project.
I want to work on Koha, not on advertising campaigns and SEO. I think marketing is one of the evils of our time. I have been promoting Koha as an idea and a library system for years before I started to officially work as a support provider, but I won't print newspaper ads or buy banners on Facebook (or whatever marketing people do) to announce my services. It would be nice if people could find out I am contributing stuff without learning to understand bugzilla. My proposal would be to have something similar to the »Patches pushed for release« thingy on http://dashboard.koha-community.org. Maybe a longer time span (like, people/ companies that have contributed over the last year), but no »all time contributers« list that would bring us lots of one time »contributions« for the sake of being listed forever. That would make it easy to see who has been active recently, and that's all it says. No endorsement. Maybe with an option to list by country. Maybe with a link to a website, maybe not. Information specialists like librarians will be able to put a name into a search engine. If they don't care about community involvement, so be it. -- Mirko -- Mirko Tietgen mirko@abunchofthings.net http://koha.abunchofthings.net http://meinkoha.de
Greetings,
It would be nice if people could find out I am contributing stuff without learning to understand bugzilla.
Sadly, if a person's name continues to appear on a list in the same place, those requesting quotes for proposals will not pay attention and learn what the list is. The learning curve forces learning. I'm sorry it is harsh, but people tend to take the path of least resistance which includes remaining ignorant of how the list works.
My proposal would be to have something similar to the »Patches pushed for release« thingy on http://dashboard.koha-community.org. Maybe a longer time span (like, people/ companies that have contributed over the last year), but no »all time contributers« list that would bring us lots of one time »contributions« for the sake of being listed forever.
A list like "Name/Organization, Country, Date of Last Accepted Patch" capped since old stable initial release would be nice, but it opens it back up to this stupidity which we want to avoid, because marketing people may hype and lie. No list provides no opportunity for them to hype and lie. GPML, Mark Tompsett
Mark Tompsett schrieb am 01.07.2015
A list like "Name/Organization, Country, Date of Last Accepted Patch" capped since old stable initial release would be nice, but it opens it back up to this stupidity which we want to avoid, because marketing people may hype and lie. No list provides no opportunity for them to hype and lie.
Do you think they will lie to git? How will they do that? :) Curious, Mirko -- Mirko Tietgen mirko@abunchofthings.net http://koha.abunchofthings.net http://meinkoha.de
Greetings, Mirko Tietgen<mirko@abunchofthings.net> wrote:
Do you think they will lie to git? How will they do that? :)
I have various bugs submitted. For example, bug 5010. That was a major contribution I feel. However, I also have tiny contributions, like bug 14112. It's a contribution, but does that 2 byte patch carry the same worth as 5010? Imagine staying listed indefinitely because you find a 2 byte patch to write every other year? They won't lie to git, they'll lie to the client who is seeking to hire someone to handle a proposal. "We're active in the community. We're on a list." 1) Will the client actual note the date? a) If so, great the client will know how hyped the community involvement is. b) If not, which is more likely since they aren't reading our beautiful disclaimer at the top of the paid support pages, they'll be duped. 2) Will the client read any beautiful disclaimer we put at the top? a) If so, great the client will know how hyped the community involvement is. b) If not, which is already the case, they'll be duped. And given the misuse of the list currently, this is why I proposed a tombstone, rather than keeping any kind of list. GPML, Mark Tompsett
How about a list of providers that is recommended by _customers_? With a provider being removed one year after the last recommendation. Steve sowder@andrews.edu On 7/1/2015 1:44 PM, Mark Tompsett wrote:
Greetings,
It would be nice if people could find out I am contributing stuff without learning to understand bugzilla.
Sadly, if a person's name continues to appear on a list in the same place, those requesting quotes for proposals will not pay attention and learn what the list is. The learning curve forces learning. I'm sorry it is harsh, but people tend to take the path of least resistance which includes remaining ignorant of how the list works.
My proposal would be to have something similar to the »Patches pushed for release« thingy on http://dashboard.koha-community.org. Maybe a longer time span (like, people/ companies that have contributed over the last year), but no »all time contributers« list that would bring us lots of one time »contributions« for the sake of being listed forever.
A list like "Name/Organization, Country, Date of Last Accepted Patch" capped since old stable initial release would be nice, but it opens it back up to this stupidity which we want to avoid, because marketing people may hype and lie. No list provides no opportunity for them to hype and lie.
GPML, Mark Tompsett _______________________________________________ Koha mailing list http://koha-community.org Koha@lists.katipo.co.nz https://lists.katipo.co.nz/mailman/listinfo/koha
Greetings, Steve Sowder<sowder@andrews.edu> wrote:
How about a list of providers that is recommended by _customers_? With a provider being removed one year after the last recommendation.
I hate to sound pessimistic, but anyone can pretend to be a customer. The only easy to maintain list that can't be misunderstood by anyone in any culture is no list. Additional bonus: no legal liabilities. GPML, Mark Tompsett
Tomas Cohen Arazi<tomascohen@gmail.com> wrote:
I propose we replace the current listing with (a) nothing or (b) some pie diagram with companies/institutions contributions (git log, or what best addresses the need) to the project.
Nothing is a little harsh. A tombstone would be better. For example, "We no longer list support providers, as this list was being used to exclude people from bidding on projects, and declaring themselves official or registered partners when Koha never had such a program or status. The list's purpose was to provide an easy list of people in various countries, not give any status to them or statement of quality about them. If you wish to see who is active in the community please search: - bugs.koha-community.org for submissions and comments by that person or company. - dashboard.koha-community.org for people who demonstrate themselves active in the community. - and if you are technical, feel free to look through the git log of the koha project cloneable from git://git.koha-community.org/koha.git We apologize for any inconvenience, but such ongoing, gross misrepresentations of the list required this list to be removed." The problem with (b) is it still provides a way for people to misrepresent. A variation on (a) in the only way. GPML, Mark Tompsett
participants (5)
-
glaws -
Mark Tompsett -
Mirko Tietgen -
Steve Sowder -
Tomas Cohen Arazi