Re: advert on webcvs

Hi,

On Tue, 24 Feb 2004, Aaron J. Seigo wrote:

> however, for sites such as kde-[look|apps].org which also have a *.kde.org 
> alias that are privately hosted and are not core informational repositories 
> for the KDE project i don't see the harm. the fact is that we have 
> kde-look.org and kde-apps.org today because of sponsorship, which translates 
> into banners.
> 
> our choices are pretty obvoius: have the community sites and accept the 
> reality that comes with being able to support them (e.g. in some cases 
> banners), fund them ourselves (would be nice, isn't a current reality), or 
> not have them. i'd prefer the second option, as i'm sure most would. i don't 
> think anyone would like the last option. so we are left, at least for now, 
> with the first option. 

Sure we most probably want them (not that we have any influence on their 
existance).  But why must they then have *.kde.org aliases?

On IRC I proposed a quite strict (and hence easy) rule:
  no A.kde.org with A != www may have any ad-like thing.  If it's a
  sponsored server its sponsor gets an entry under 
  www.kde.org/support/thanks.php

That's perceived as too strict by some people.  Alternatives would be to
allow a short (defined) text to link/refer to the sponsor on the servers
main page (!), like
  "This server/service is sponsored/payed for by $SPONSOR."

Still others might want to allow a static picture referring to the 
sponsor, although this quickly leads to quite ambiguous cases.

Others want case-by-case, but that's cumbersome to enforce.

I think most would at least agree that animated banners are a no-go for 
any *.kde.org .


Ciao,
Michael.