Re: [Joomla-Leadership-Group] Open response to an occurring issue

511 views
Skip to first unread message

Sarah Watz

unread,
Nov 3, 2015, 1:03:36 PM11/3/15
to joomla-l...@googlegroups.com, joomla-...@googlegroups.com
The Capital Team and the board have listened to the feedback on the proposal to place a banner for Google Apps in "Install from Web". We are now focusing on looking at other possibilities and suggestions for this partnership. During the past days community members have given a lot of input to the discussion and have come up with actionable alternatives / suggestion for partnership that will be taken into account as well. Thank you for your feedback.

With warmth,
Sarah

Sarah Watz
President, Open Source Matters, Inc.
http://opensourcematters.org/

Hannes Papenberg

unread,
Nov 3, 2015, 2:02:16 PM11/3/15
to joomla-...@googlegroups.com, joomla-l...@googlegroups.com
Ok, so I've not raised my voice about this whole
banner-in-Joomla-backend thing because I thought the message was sent
across the first 20 hatemails that came over the joomla-dev-cms
mailinglist and I didn't think it was necessary for me to add yet
another mail to all of this. But this response is so smooshy squishy
I-don't-wanna-say-it-but-I-have-to-say-something, that I ask you: Either
properly say it right out and retract this or don't say anything at all.
This response sounds more like you still haven't given up on it and just
want to silence us until we forgot about it.

I'm not saying that you are trying to still pursue this, but from a PR
standpoint this was probably the worst message that you could send. It
not only does not state that the deal is off, it rather kicks the door
even further open for assumptions and conspiracy theories, deepening the
distrust some here already have.

Feel free to copy the following and re-post it as the official response:

The Capital Team and the board have listened to the feedback on the
proposal to place a banner for Google Apps in "Install from Web". We
hear your criticism and will not pursue this any further. The Capital
Team has the task from OSM to find financial sources for the project and
one of the proposals was this advertising. The idea was pursued in good
faith and we did not consider how problematic this could be for several
of our users. We are sorry and we are now focusing on looking at other
possibilities and suggestions. During the past days community members
have given a lot of input to the discussion and have come up with
actionable alternatives / suggestion for partnership that will be taken
into account as well. Thank you for your feedback.

Regards,
Hannes
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "Joomla! CMS Development" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
> an email to joomla-dev-cm...@googlegroups.com
> <mailto:joomla-dev-cm...@googlegroups.com>.
> To post to this group, send email to joomla-...@googlegroups.com
> <mailto:joomla-...@googlegroups.com>.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/joomla-dev-cms.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Webdongle Elgnodbew

unread,
Nov 3, 2015, 2:20:06 PM11/3/15
to Joomla! CMS Development, joomla-l...@googlegroups.com
@Sarah Watz

Two straight forward questions
  • Was the deal verbal or was a formal contract signed ?
    • If so who signed on behalf of Joomla

  • Are you or any member of the OSM or Capital Team receiving any inducements (either financial or otherwise) for pushing the deal onto the Joomla community ?
    • N.B. This is a Yes/No question not a question that requires a procrastinated answer.

Sarah Watz

unread,
Nov 3, 2015, 2:51:15 PM11/3/15
to Joomla! CMS Development, joomla-l...@googlegroups.com
1) No contract has been signed. I'm the only one that signs contracts on behalf of Open Source Matters, Inc.
2) No.

For your information: I'm getting ready to travel to JWC in 12 hours.
I will meet with some of the membes of the Capital Team at JWC that are attending to discuss what we have learnt.

//Sarah

Chad Windnagle

unread,
Nov 3, 2015, 5:16:50 PM11/3/15
to joomla-...@googlegroups.com
Thanks Sarah for the precise answers. I know you're 
Getting ready for JWC.

The biggest question I still have is this:

There's mention of funds that were expected to be attained by OSM via the site ground contract, and that expectation wasn't met. Can you shed some light on this situation? What were the actual goals and what actually was achieved? and, what is the reason (if any) that the goals weren't met (if they indeed were not). 

I realize this wasn't the main objections the community had with this proposal, but it's something that's come up that I believe bares some clarity. 

Regards
Chad Windnagle

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Joomla! CMS Development" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to joomla-dev-cm...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to joomla-...@googlegroups.com.


--
Regards,
Chad Windnagle

Ronni Christiansen

unread,
Nov 4, 2015, 1:52:02 AM11/4/15
to Joomla! CMS Development
Disclaimer: I am a member of the Capital Team and the JWC team and currently leading the Legal Team - and this posts is my personal opinion :)

I negotiated this proposal from Google and i am in no way what so ever ashamed or sad i did so.

The fact is that income is down from our Google Adsense income (which has been the _main_ income for Joomla for 10 years - the irony is not to be lost) by up to 65%.

One of the factors of this is that the install from web remote loads the JED into the backend of Joomla.

Doing so might be easier for people but it also heavily removes the income base which pays for codesprints, events, JET program etc. 

Part of the goal of the capital team is to find new sources of income and specially in this case where we could be facing a up to 40% cut in budget for 2016 compared to 2015 - it is vital that new sources of income is found.

  • The JED _is_ a commercial platform. (Google Adsense)
  • The Install from Web - lists - Commercial companies selling their 3rd party extensions for Joomla.
  • The Install from web is not active in the CMS - but needs to be activated.
  • Once activated it loads a remote view in from the JED server showing a list of ads for commercial parties selling their extensions for Joomla.

The IFW is also processed by the webserver handling the remote loaded views meaning that all data is actually processed back "home" through that process (its not used for anything or aggregated but it still flows through)

Since our main income for 10 years has been from advertising coming through Google - and the JED is a commercial platform - and install from web is actually not shipped with the CMS but requires activation.

We did in no way find this problematic and as such we have negotiated this in good faith with google.

We do ofcause not do negotiations like this in public - noone does - so please wake up from your pseudo reality - if you want to be considered serious from large companies etc. for partnerships or sponsorships you need to adjust to the real world where they exist.

Everything in this process followed the procedures as it should 100%

Noone has anything to explain or be sorry about.

The Capital Team had liasons to OSM and PLT and the Legal Team was onboard too - all negotiations happend in good faith and the proposal was presented back through the liaisons.

The entire initiative comes out of hard work for the project - for the community - and to try and help save all those good initiatives that are ongoing this year - so its also realistic next year.

The only thing that went wrong in this entire case is that someone leaked it while in process - instead of responding with their objections and ideas for a different approach.

But make no mistake this volunteer community is build on right of initiative for working groups and decentralized processes - its built on trust and confidence.

Its not built on leaking information or spreading false information to fuel some alterior agenda - and the people who worked on this as well as the teams involved (who are also volunteers) deserve full credits for trying to help the community and project.

We dont throw people under the bus - we dont throw partners under the bus - we dont throw sponsors under the bus.

Everytime someone starts yelling all they can on twitter etc. to hurt Joomla's brand and the community - everyone else should be reminding them of how bad an idea that is.

Have you considered that it will be near impossible to land new partnerships or global sponsorships after this very public "pissing contest" of our most important funding partner since the start?

So just to sum it all up:

Not sorry
Not ashamed
Still worried over 2016 budget
Still tired of childish behavior
Still tired of people acting out on the "interwebs" when it could all be settled with a constructive debate and proposals to try and HELP out

But at the end of the day maybe what people want is that we dont have any activities at all???

If not and you actually do have some constructive ideas i suggest you put on your positive hat and try and come up with cool ideas to how we can improve our income side so that we can continue to fund all of these super initiatives - did you know that in 2015 we have held more code sprints than ever? wouldnt it be a shame to see them dissapear again?

So to put it in other words - be part of the solution - not the problem.

Thanks.

Bakual

unread,
Nov 4, 2015, 2:21:19 AM11/4/15
to Joomla! CMS Development
I want to adress the main misconception about IFW/JED you seem to have to prevent spending time into similar ideas in future. The JED is monetised by ads, yes. Nothing wrong with that.
But the JED by itself is NOT a commercial platform and is NOT an advertisment for extensions. It's a directory like a telephone book (for those who remember those things *g*) or the Google search. Nobody refers to those listings as advertisment. There are commercial extensions in it, yes, but there are also many, many non-commercial extensions in it. The most important point is that nobody paid anything to be listed there, the listing is free for all. Unlike the advertisment on the site which is paid.

That's why it is fine to show the directory in the Joomla Backend, but it's not fine to show paid advertisment in it. I hope you understand that difference.

Gary Jay Brooks

unread,
Nov 4, 2015, 2:46:06 AM11/4/15
to Joomla! CMS Development
Did you get the answers to these questions chad?
Chad Windnagle

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to joomla-dev-cms+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to joomla-dev-cms@googlegroups.com.


--
Regards,
Chad Windnagle

Ronni Christiansen

unread,
Nov 4, 2015, 3:01:22 AM11/4/15
to joomla-...@googlegroups.com
I dont think the JED can be compared to the JRD - its not just a phonebook - its actual listings for concrete extensions - those with mulltiple extensions (products) has multiple listings - so its not the company thats listed but its products.

An alternative model could be to have all commercial parties pay say 100 usd a year to get the right to list commercial extensions - if there is 1000 of those thats 100k of funding - which would make up for some of the lost income - the amount could be different too.

But in any case it would not be bad to see those with strong commercial interests who are listed in the JED and IFW already with product listings chip in to compensate for the lost banner revenues from the JED.

Alternative ideas absolutely welcome too.

@chad @gary not my table but let me share what i know: no he didnt yet because its not publicly available - its being cleared off with the partner and finalized along with the 2016 budget process - within long a new budget for 2016 should be ready (i know the process is ongoing now and all the teams and budget line items owners are contributing to that process right now - you where a part of the same process last year Chad) - To those of you who doesnt realize this then OSM has repositioned most teams back under CLT and PLT in the last 2 years including their budgets which means that for the estimated final revised budget for 2015 the OSM budget share is around 25% where as half of that goes to lawyers to defend the trademark (personally i think thats silly but thats something old leadership many years ago decided to do and its been done since) - which leaves around 10-12% of the collective budget for the remaining teams and activities under OSM. The remaining 75% or so of the budget is owned by lineitems owners in the budget from PLT and CLT and they have full control with the spending under those lineitems.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Joomla! CMS Development" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/joomla-dev-cms/ynZ74AHwa3E/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to joomla-dev-cm...@googlegroups.com.

Bakual

unread,
Nov 4, 2015, 4:32:47 AM11/4/15
to Joomla! CMS Development
Imho the real issue of the lost JED revenue isn't in the IFW. It's because the JED currently isn't very useful when you want to search for an extension.
I never use IFW myself when I have to search for an extension, but I also don't use the JED for the actual search. I use Google which points me to the JED entry (or the developer page), The results there are much better. Imho, that is the real issue we have. I think part of it is because the categories navigation is confusing. You have the breadcrumbs on the extension itself, but on the category view you don't have it anymore. It's instead just a filter in the search. From the homepage you have a prominent categories list which invites to browse, but once inside the category, there is no nice list of subcategories. And the categories seem to be tags at the same time. That's something which could be improved.

Also there is only an advertisment slot on the main page and the search results page. There are pages without adds, eg http://extensions.joomla.org/tags/living or the extension detailpage. Those are the pages which are linked most likely on Google Search results, thus people enter from those sites and don't get any advertisment at all. Maybe that could be improved as well.

And there are several reports about the rating system being strange. The rating would be the main point why you even go to JED. This HAS to be working reliable or you loose the visitors because they don't trust the rating anymore.

I don't think requesting money from those listing paid extensions will do the trick. It would indeed turn JED (a directory, hence the name) into an advertisment platform. Only a few commercial extensions will be listed in the end (the big ones for which it pais out to pay for the ad place) and all others will just list their free extension (eg a free basic version of their commercial extension). In the end you would loose even more visitors and loose even more money than what you gain for the paid JED slots.

So in the end, I think there is a lot which could be improved on JED itself to raise visitor counts and thus ad revenue.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to joomla-dev-cms+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to joomla-dev-cms@googlegroups.com.

Paulo Faustino

unread,
Nov 4, 2015, 8:14:09 AM11/4/15
to joomla-...@googlegroups.com

You should be ashamed of your email tantrum.

What you just described is that you don’t feel you have to explain anything to the community, forgetting that Joomla exists because there’s a community, otherwise you wouldn’t have volunteers or interest in using this CMS. It’s not like there are no alternatives out there.

 

By the way, when you say.

Still tired of people acting out on the "interwebs" when it could all be settled with a constructive debate and proposals to try and HELP out”

 

You do realize that it can only happen if you don’t act in private, right?

 

 

You want a contructive proposal? Heres one.

Kill the " The Install from Web”. Everyone will need to go to the JED again. Maybe even add an intro to the JED, let’s call it a “call to action”.

 

Maybe not perfect, but certainly better than feeding ads into the Joomla Backend.

 

Remember that a solution doesn’t mean that the end result is the one you would like it to be.

 

 

Best Regards,

Paulo Faustino

--

Ronni Christiansen

unread,
Nov 4, 2015, 8:26:00 AM11/4/15
to joomla-...@googlegroups.com

I have No preference as to resultat
The job of the Capital team is to find oportunities of income not to be judges.

And constructive participation was part of the original process... witch was then sidestepped.

And as for your interpretation of my mail its just plan wrong... the point was to be a community you also need to respect it and the volunteers doing the job... so if you have something to add then show that respect and be constructive... any idiot can go on Twitter and call people idiots.

You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Joomla! CMS Development" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/joomla-dev-cms/ynZ74AHwa3E/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to joomla-dev-cm...@googlegroups.com.
Message has been deleted

Tomasz Kisielewski

unread,
Nov 4, 2015, 9:03:25 AM11/4/15
to joomla-...@googlegroups.com
It is mainly communication and transparency issue. Everyone understands that Joomla needs as much money as possible, no doubts about it. Even the most stupid idea during brain storm is worth consideration as it may lead to something good, but before any negotiations attempts, the general idea should be "consulted" with community ( transparency ). I hope OSM will learn from this unfortunate mistake. If JED is loosing then improve website, put link to JED into Joomla ( remove install from web ) instead of paid ads. Start to host Joomla templates not only extensions, drupal and wordpress do, why Joomla can't? Why not to introduce paid support something like drupal association ( https://assoc.drupal.org/membership ) where people pay yearly donation and use Joomla badge on their websites to show support. It has been started by drupal, but if there is some money to make, why not to try? It is really hard to find something unique these days,but OSM with its "paid ads built in to Joomla" really did it.


web design and development

www.tkstudiodesign.com



Michael Babker

unread,
Nov 4, 2015, 9:15:38 AM11/4/15
to joomla-...@googlegroups.com
I've asked several loaded questions in the last week with no response, and I've made statements with verifiable data that nobody wants to address.  And quite frankly, until I get responses to these statements, I'm going to keep pushing them ever so slightly; you're damn right I'm pissed off and have an agenda now.

So, for the fourth time, I'll ask this question specifically toward those who were negotiating the deal with Google, but more generally anyone else is welcome to respond too.  Would you, as CEO's of businesses which produce Joomla extensions, or extension developers yourselves, be willing to place third party advertisements in your own extensions in the same manner in which you were so eager to place third party advertisements in the Install from Web service?  Explain your answer.

Statement two.  In August 2013, JoomlaCode saw a traffic decline from over 10,000 sessions per day to just over 100 sessions per day (source: Google Analytics).  This was about the same timeframe of the last major upgrade of the GForge software, which ended up being a huge mistake considering how unstable the site became, but that's beside the point.  What I can derive from that data is that either a bug exists (or existed) in GForge and that either the old or new version caused a change in reported traffic metrics or that upgrade resulted in a 99% loss of traffic.  Now why is that significant to this thread?  Depending on the page (and if the platform is actually functional), there are two or three ad spaces displayed to the user.  In an almost overnight shift, 99% of traffic was lost.  Not one peep about it was made, which would presumably have included a major loss in ad revenue.  If this project is in such a dire financial situation (which can only be assumed based on the doom and gloom Ronni presents with our funding shortfalls and the lack of any reporting from the Treasurer), why have we gone two years now without addressing that particular issue?

Cyril Rezé

unread,
Nov 4, 2015, 9:37:11 AM11/4/15
to Joomla! CMS Development
@tomkis : Just open a new topic here, with a proposal : https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!topic/joomla-dev-cms/Hm33kbXlawE ;-)

Leo Lammerink

unread,
Nov 4, 2015, 9:46:15 AM11/4/15
to joomla-...@googlegroups.com
You are flying to India with some stops I learned on Twitter...Are you flying EC of BC and did you use your Frequent Flyer Points for this trip to relieve the financial burden on Joomla?

Leo Lammerink
MD GWS - Enterprise Ltd
Skype: gwsgroup
www.gws-desk.com | www.gws-host.com | www.gws-studio.com | www.gws-deals.today

Paul Orwig

unread,
Nov 4, 2015, 10:01:59 AM11/4/15
to joomla-...@googlegroups.com
If the community had access to an appropriate amount of current facts and data, then the community could understand more about what is happening and why. That's one of the reasons why openness and transparency is important - to take advantage of the knowledge, experience, ideas and passion throughout the community, instead of only a few.

If I recall correctly, the leaked screenshot of the original email only mentioned SiteGround as the source for lost revenue, but ever since then it seems all the official explanations are that the source of the revenue problem is JED, and indirectly IFW because it cannibalizes JED traffic.

Please clarify as much as possible regarding the reference to SiteGround in the leaked screenshot.

Please provide whatever facts and data you can about expected traffic loss to JED that can reasonably tied to IFW. If I recall correctly, IFW was or has been disabled for a known period of time due to some technical issues. If IFW truly represents a significant source of JED traffic loss, it should be easy to see a significant upward spike in JED traffic during the time period that IFW has been disabled. If there is no significant upward spike in JED traffic during that time, it suggests IFW is not the source of a significant JED traffic loss.

Joomla and OSM certainly need money to fund worthwhile initiatives, but I believe most end users want to choose the best software to meet their needs. If we want to bring in more money for the project, I believe the best, but not quickest, solution is to put more of a focus on improving the software, so that more users will want to use Joomla. If we do that, it should lead to more traffic on the JED, and more interest from sponsors, etc. In the short term, I suggest reducing expenses to balance the budget. It's good that we had more code sprints this year, but my understanding (in hearing directly from multiple code sprint participants) is that not all of this year's code sprints have been very productive or effective.

So, my final question is - how do we feel we are doing to improve the software? Are we supporting and encouraging volunteer developers, or are we driving our developers away? Because in the end, if we continue losing volunteer developers, we will continue to lose end users, and then it doesn't really matter how or where we put advertising.

Thanks,

paul



Sully Sullivan

unread,
Nov 4, 2015, 11:10:42 AM11/4/15
to joomla-...@googlegroups.com
I would like some insights and analysis is of why our ad revenue has declined so much. These are my guesses at possible reasons. Maybe someone can confirm what metrics are available?

* Fewer impressions at the JED because Install from Web has diverted traffic. At least one way to answer this may be to compare how revenue from ads on other high-traffic Joomla! assets like our forum and documentation/help sites changed in comparison to the JED. Is there a disparity?
* Fewer impressions overall--does the sum of JED traffic plus Install From Web traffic point to overall declining traffic?
* Declining value of CMS audience as attention switches to mobile device native apps?
* Declining value of our audience based on advertiser's demographic needs? (i.e., the most lucrative may be looking for North American or Western European eyeballs and we are offer increasingly more of other regions of the world?)
 
Just some thoughts. It would be great if there was a place where the community could view some of this data (I realize some might be sensitive to our negotiating position. Hence, "some" not "all."). We could crowd-source some creative solutions. We have a lot of the world's smartest people in our community.

Best,
Sully
 

Webdongle Elgnodbew

unread,
Nov 4, 2015, 12:20:26 PM11/4/15
to Joomla! CMS Development
@Ronni Christiansen

Your post is a disgrace ... either you fail to understand the symbiotic relationship between professionals and talented amateurs who contribute to the Joomla project or you are trying to run 'rough shod' over it.



"I negotiated this proposal from Google and i am in no way what so ever ashamed or sad i did so."
Shows a total lack of understanding the 'freedom' that free software provides.  By introducing paid ads into free software gives the advertiser exclusivity that excludes others ... and thus removes the freedom of the free software.  It allows the advertiser to dictate the direction of the project.

But your statement raises a few more questions.
Who did Google make the proposal to ?
Why did they select that person to make the proposal to ?
Do they have contact with that person for other matters ?



"Part of the goal of the capital team is to find new sources of income"
That statement is only partially correct and therefore misleading.  You miss out that the 'new sources of income' must be in keeping with the ethos of free software in general and of Joomla specifically.  But placing ads into free software changes it from free software into shareware/adware ... and shareware/adware has a totally different ethos to freeware.  Shareware/adware does not have a 'symbiotic relationship between professionals and talented amateurs'.


  • "The JED _is_ a commercial platform. (Google Adsense)"
No ... JED is a website that uses free software.  Developers choose to have their (commercial/non-commercial) extensions listed ... having a listing on a site that has adverts has no comparison to changing free software into shareware/adware.

The rest of your post is full of general observations added as a feeble attempt to justify your actions but in reality are no justification for your negotiating a deal that would turn Joomla into shareware/adware.

Leo Lammerink

unread,
Nov 4, 2015, 12:27:31 PM11/4/15
to joomla-...@googlegroups.com
@ Kevin (webdongle) +/+ 100

"Christiansen and his Redcomponent - gang rule " (who cares about those suckers who represent that so called community? )

Leo
--

brian teeman

unread,
Nov 4, 2015, 12:49:30 PM11/4/15
to Joomla! CMS Development, joomla-l...@googlegroups.com
Can we try to stick to the issue and not the person

Leo Lammerink

unread,
Nov 4, 2015, 12:58:09 PM11/4/15
to joomla-...@googlegroups.com

Issue = related to persons You cannot avoid that here Brian. Certain persons who take 'decisions' without agreement of this community need to know that this community is not happy

On 11/5/2015 12:49 AM, brian teeman wrote:
Can we try to stick to the issue and not the person

Michael Babker

unread,
Nov 4, 2015, 1:03:05 PM11/4/15
to joomla-...@googlegroups.com
You can still attack the actions and behaviors without resorting to personal attacks on specific individuals.  That's what Brian's trying to say.

Leo Lammerink

unread,
Nov 4, 2015, 1:05:26 PM11/4/15
to joomla-...@googlegroups.com

Sometimes Michael as you know very well is expressing thoughts about people's posts who express themselves very clearly and intensively is very much allowed If a person here on these threats places himself fully in front of the Capital Team he/She should expect the storm

Cheers

Leo Lammerink

unread,
Nov 4, 2015, 1:07:07 PM11/4/15
to joomla-...@googlegroups.com
or better stated: "weather themselves for the storm"

Michael Babker

unread,
Nov 4, 2015, 1:08:36 PM11/4/15
to joomla-...@googlegroups.com
Like I said, attack the behaviors and actions without resorting to personal attacks on those folks.  There is a fine line.  See one of my posts from earlier today where I very explicitly question some folks judgement and behaviors without attacking their individual character.

Robert

unread,
Nov 4, 2015, 1:18:11 PM11/4/15
to Joomla! CMS Development
Here is the real fun fact. The PLT decided (six months ago I think) to remove the server between the IFW and the JED and I have re-build the IFW plugin to directly communicate with the JED and just grab data and render the data on the client.That is also not really a secret I have send messages (at least tweets),I think it is mentioned in PLT minutes and so on. It isn't implemented (rolled out) yet because there are some performance issues and the JED team can't work on it because there are some things to do (Legal??) on OSM site (I don't have details, that is only what I got form different conversations).

To keep a long story short the technical way to do it is not an option.

Cheers,
Robert

Webdongle Elgnodbew

unread,
Nov 4, 2015, 1:51:32 PM11/4/15
to Joomla! CMS Development, joomla-l...@googlegroups.com
The person and the issue are interlinked in this case. Vis-à-vis
  • The negotiation was conducted between Google and one Person
  • That persons ability to understand (or deliberate ignoring ) the ethos of free software
  • That persons intentions
  • That persons ability to balance expenditure to income without turning Joomla into shareware/adware
  • That persons connections with Google

Are all interlinked



Leo (like myself) can sometimes get 'hot under the collar' but that is because he is passionate about Joomla. imho in this issue he is asking pertinent questions that are not being answered correctly by Ronni Christiansen.  In fact Leo has very clearly pointed out where Ronni Christiansen has made totally erroneous and false statements.  How Ronni Christiansen can claim the PLT were consulted before the email that was leaked ... is incomprehensible.  For him to claim that shows either incompetence of the highest level or a deliberate attempt to deceive at the lowest level.  All Leo has done is bring Ronni Christiansen's unreliable statements into view.

Ronni Christiansen

unread,
Nov 4, 2015, 2:18:11 PM11/4/15
to joomla-...@googlegroups.com, joomla-l...@googlegroups.com
Paul: I can not account for someones leaks of partial data nor for their reasoning behind that not is it my role.

I can however tell you that once the formal budget process, which is in progress now, is finished everything from all LT's etc will be shared as allways.

I do realize you think you should have some insights in this now - but when you where the president you didnt offer the same insights into process details like this so i dont know what has changed - in many ways the procedures now is a continuation of earlier procedures however with more decentralization of budget power than ever before.

Webdongle/Leo: your continueing down the same old path as many times before - facts are cleary not on your side - this was not negotiated by 1 person but by people from a TEAM which role it is to do these things. Lets also make it quite clear that PLT was brought onboard by the PLT Liaison - before anything was leaked. Again this is the factual matter and anyone from PLT can confirm this (as so did Chris on the public leadership mailinglist). And just a FYI my flight was on economy class as it always is and is not funded by the project - but by the JWC where i also sponsor for the 4th year in a row - in the last 8 years or so i have sponsored around 150000 USD to joomla events all over the world - setting the rate high by total cost for the project as a whole has been less than 5% of that - so please spare me from your petty accusations.

Its very simple to check those facts - but the question remains if you are interested in the facts.

Changing the facts and truth to fit your person attacks is just to low - its not befitting for any debate at all.

Its perfectly OK to not approve of the overall idea, its perfectly ok to be against it - again those topics are as such outside of the scope of the capital team which role is quite clear.

Once a working group / team is mandated with a job and the volunteers does that job - we fundamentally need to respect that effort and contribution to the project and community - we may disagree and we can offer alternatives and better proposals etc. but at the end of the day you are not really contributing anything if your primary role and goal is to take a dump on people whenever the chance arises - your just part of the underlying problem.

Its not like we send every PLT vote to a public debate after each of their meetings right? Its not like anyone who was ever in leadership and seems to find somethings problematic now ever in any way did anything that added more transparency than there is now.

Michael you have some interesting stats / facts - when we tried to get stats / facts out in the earlier parts of our negotiations we where told there where none to work with.

In general the Capital Team nor OSM for that matter has any insights or access to data from the websites etc. those lies entirely within the PLT and CLT.

So if you are looking for concrete data and numbers i am affraid we dont have them - when we requested numbers on the IFW and the JED the closest we got was some estimations.

I think its super important to figure out why it is that there is such a decrease in income from the JED - i also think its super relevant to debate weater the commercial parties should pay some form of symbolic yearly payment too - after all they do have a commercial interest - but maybe if we increase banner positions that will happen naturally (i personally suggested adding 1 more banner on category level and 1 banner on all extension landing pages on the JED as it has none now and in my estimations that alone can account for quite a lot).

FYI: The same people who has been working on the google proposal has also assembled a team with the JED Leader and Marketing Team Leader to make a new global banner rotation system across all the joomla websites.

Also lets clarify a few things just to keep it factual.

OSM did not initiate anything in relation to the proposal from Google - i see people who still wants to paint that picture its simply not true.

The entire process was handled in the capital team via liaisons to OSM and PLT and was brought up 100% in the correct procedure.

I am very sorry - but not every deciousion in joomla is raised in a public forum - specially not when involving partners. sponsors or individuals - it never has in the last 10 years of history of joomla and it shoulndt.

To handle individual related cases you need to respect the individual - to handle negotiations with sponsors or partners you again need to respect them.

That is the real world implication of doing partnerships and sponsorships - and its been like this all the time.

If a public RFC is made for anything then the foundation of whats happening is known - but none of the bids are, none of the negotiations are and only once the final agreement is in place (and handled by X amount of teams / leadership) the final data is shown in the budgets etc. which are all public and fully transparent including lineitem owners etc.

I really appreciate some of the very concrete good ideas that has been posted in this thread - it makes me positive for finding future solutions to mend the gabs that has arisen.

As you have most likely also realized by now - i am actually going for the ball - we have a problem and we need a solution.

If you care about the community and project you will try and chip in and find solutions - any idea is welcome and i am sure this threas as the attention of all interested parties.

Id love to end this off with a proposal myself:

A cross team action team focusing on the JED / IFW and how to optimize the monitization within the scopes of what is found acceptable (again - i dont have a personal reference for me what matters is enabling others in pursuiing the activities that grow and empower Joomla).

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Joomla! CMS Development" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/joomla-dev-cms/ynZ74AHwa3E/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to joomla-dev-cm...@googlegroups.com.

Radek Suski

unread,
Nov 4, 2015, 2:29:52 PM11/4/15
to Joomla! CMS Development, joomla-l...@googlegroups.com
Thank you Sarah for opening this discussion.

I have a couple of questions concerning the current situation:
  • Why the community was no aware of the problem? I do not expect of course direct blog post informing people that we are in trouble but I read OSM minutes and there was no information about any issues. Actually quite contrary to. I found only one single information about Joe negotiating with Google about Google Apps. As a side note, the OSM team seems to be misinformed about the events team activity. Looks pretty bad.
  • You are saying that the capital team was negotiating this. But as far I can say at least two members of the team were not aware of any of this. It actually looks like only two people were involved in this activity.
  • Why the community, or even just the PLT has not been consulted before any negotiations with Google even started? 
  • Did anyone tried to find out why the revenue from Google Ads dropped that drastically? As far as I can say not that many people are using the IFW feature, that it would cause such a drastic decrease
Thanks in advance.
Regards,
Radek

Paul Orwig

unread,
Nov 4, 2015, 2:43:20 PM11/4/15
to joomla-...@googlegroups.com, joomla-l...@googlegroups.com
Ronni,

I am sorry but I have a difficult time believing what you wrote here:


In general the Capital Team nor OSM for that matter has any insights or access to data from the websites etc. those lies entirely within the PLT and CLT.

So if you are looking for concrete data and numbers i am affraid we dont have them - when we requested numbers on the IFW and the JED the closest we got was some estimations.

When I was on OSM, there wasn't any problem for me to have full access to joomla.org website traffic analytics, and I believe the Capital team leader also had the same access. I can't imagine that OSM would not have similar access now.

If what you wrote is true, then did PLT and CLT remove access for OSM to web analytics? Or, did OSM ask for access to be reinstated but PLT and CLT refused?

Unless I misunderstand what you wrote, either there are much more serious breakdowns between leadership teams than the community has been led to believe, or we aren't being told the full truth.

paul



 



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Joomla! CMS Development" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to joomla-dev-cm...@googlegroups.com.

brian teeman

unread,
Nov 4, 2015, 2:51:16 PM11/4/15
to Joomla! CMS Development, joomla-l...@googlegroups.com


On Wednesday, 4 November 2015 19:18:11 UTC, Ronni Christiansen wrote:
Michael you have some interesting stats / facts - when we tried to get stats / facts out in the earlier parts of our negotiations we where told there where none to work with.

In general the Capital Team nor OSM for that matter has any insights or access to data from the websites etc. those lies entirely within the PLT and CLT.


I've seen those stats so I know for a fact they exist and at the time I was shown them they were from the Marketing Team which again at that time was under the remit of OSM.

brian teeman

unread,
Nov 4, 2015, 3:20:43 PM11/4/15
to Joomla! CMS Development
The bare naked truth about Joomla!'s data https://youtu.be/rwttFiH2pbs via @YouTube
Presentation at jab14

Webdongle Elgnodbew

unread,
Nov 4, 2015, 3:43:30 PM11/4/15
to Joomla! CMS Development, joomla-l...@googlegroups.com
@ Ronni Christiansen


"Lets also make it quite clear that PLT was brought onboard by the PLT Liaison - before anything was leaked"
Again you twist the facts.  Clearly the PLT were 'brought onboard' before the leak because the leak was about the notification to the PLT.  What is in question is that claim the PLT were 'onboard'

You stated

"The Capital Team had liasons to OSM and PLT and the Legal Team was onboard too- all negotiations happend in good faith and the proposal was presented back through the liaisons".
 Yet George Wilson states that the leaked email "was the only communication as of when it got leaked".  For you to claim otherwise then try to hide your false statement (by misdirection of the time line) is despicable.


You claim

" this was not negotiated by 1 person but by people from a TEAM which role it is to do these things."
Which contradicts what you said in your initial post when you 'broke cover'
You said

"I negotiated this proposal from Google"
Those two statements are mutually exclusive and therefore at least one of your statements is proven false.



" i have sponsored around 150000 USD to joomla events all over the world"
You or your companies ? And was it for purely magnanimous or just a good business strategy ?




"OSM did not initiate anything in relation to the proposal from Google"
Again you reverse what was asked.  It was asked who Google approached and why they chose that person.




"The entire process was handled in the capital team via liaisons to OSM and PLT and was brought up 100% in the correct procedure"
Yet again you make a false statement because it is evident the leaked email was the first communication to the PLT and was subsequent to the process of negotiating the deal
)



"I am very sorry - but not every deciousion in joomla is raised in a public forum - specially not when involving partners. sponsors or individuals"
The issue is not about notifications in a public forum (or elsewhere) about "involving partners. sponsors or individuals" ... it's about you negotiating a deal with Google that in reality changes Joomla from free software into shareware/adware.  A blind man with a white stick can see that ... so surely a man with your business acumen can also see it.  But you continue to try and misdirect the issue with rhetoric and false/incorrect statements.


On Wednesday, 4 November 2015 19:18:11 UTC, Ronni Christiansen wrote:

romacron

unread,
Nov 4, 2015, 9:08:59 PM11/4/15
to joomla-...@googlegroups.com
I like the payment idea for commercial extensions.
Perhaps the payment plans should be discussed.

"If you earn money with JED you can give a little bit back"

+1

Am 04.11.2015 um 09:01 schrieb Ronni Christiansen:
> I dont think the JED can be compared to the JRD - its not just a
> phonebook - its actual listings for concrete extensions - those with
> mulltiple extensions (products) has multiple listings - so its not the
> company thats listed but its products.
>
> An alternative model could be to have all commercial parties pay say 100
> usd a year to get the right to list commercial extensions - if there is
> 1000 of those thats 100k of funding - which would make up for some of
> the lost income - the amount could be different too.
>
> But in any case it would not be bad to see those with strong commercial
> interests who are listed in the JED and IFW already with product
> listings chip in to compensate for the lost banner revenues from the JED.
>
> Alternative ideas absolutely welcome too.
>
> @chad @gary not my table but let me share what i know: no he didnt yet
> because its not publicly available - its being cleared off with the
> partner and finalized along with the 2016 budget process - within long a
> new budget for 2016 should be ready (i know the process is ongoing now
> and all the teams and budget line items owners are contributing to that
> process right now - you where a part of the same process last year Chad)
> - To those of you who doesnt realize this then OSM has repositioned most
> teams back under CLT and PLT in the last 2 years including their budgets
> which means that for the estimated final revised budget for 2015 the OSM
> budget share is around 25% where as half of that goes to lawyers to
> defend the trademark (personally i think thats silly but thats something
> old leadership many years ago decided to do and its been done since) -
> which leaves around 10-12% of the collective budget for the remaining
> teams and activities under OSM. The remaining 75% or so of the budget is
> owned by lineitems owners in the budget from PLT and CLT and they have
> full control with the spending under those lineitems.
>
> On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 8:21 AM, Bakual <werbe...@bakual.ch
> <mailto:werbe...@bakual.ch>> wrote:
>
> I want to adress the main misconception about IFW/JED you seem to
> have to prevent spending time into similar ideas in future. The JED
> is monetised by ads, yes. Nothing wrong with that.
> But the JED by itself is NOT a commercial platform and is NOT an
> advertisment for extensions. It's a directory like a telephone book
> (for those who remember those things *g*) or the Google search.
> Nobody refers to those listings as advertisment. There are
> commercial extensions in it, yes, but there are also many, many
> non-commercial extensions in it. The most important point is that
> nobody paid anything to be listed there, the listing is free for
> all. Unlike the advertisment on the site which is paid.
>
> That's why it is fine to show the directory in the Joomla Backend,
> but it's not fine to show paid advertisment in it. I hope you
> understand that difference.
>
> Am Mittwoch, 4. November 2015 07:52:02 UTC+1 schrieb Ronni Christiansen:
>
> Disclaimer: I am a member of the Capital Team and the JWC team
> and currently leading the Legal Team - and this posts is my
> personal opinion :)
>
> I negotiated this proposal from Google and i am in no way what
> so ever ashamed or sad i did so.
>
> The fact is that income is down from our Google Adsense income
> (which has been the _main_ income for Joomla for 10 years - the
> irony is not to be lost) by up to 65%.
>
> One of the factors of this is that the install from web remote
> loads the JED into the backend of Joomla.
>
> Doing so might be easier for people but it also heavily removes
> the income base which pays for codesprints, events, JET program
> etc.
>
> Part of the goal of the capital team is to find new sources of
> income and specially in this case where we could be facing a up
> to 40% cut in budget for 2016 compared to 2015 - it is vital
> that new sources of income is found.
>
> * The JED _is_ a commercial platform. (Google Adsense)
> * The Install from Web - lists - Commercial companies selling
> their 3rd party extensions for Joomla.
> * The Install from web is not active in the CMS - but needs to
> be activated.
> * Once activated it loads a remote view in from the JED server
> showing a list of ads for commercial parties selling their
> extensions for Joomla.
>
>
> The IFW is also processed by the webserver handling the remote
> loaded views meaning that all data is actually processed back
> "home" through that process (its not used for anything or
> aggregated but it still flows through)
>
> Since our main income for 10 years has been from advertising
> coming through Google - and the JED is a commercial platform -
> and install from web is actually not shipped with the CMS but
> requires activation.
>
> We did in no way find this problematic and as such we have
> negotiated this in good faith with google.
>
> We do ofcause not do negotiations like this in public - noone
> does - so please wake up from your pseudo reality - if you want
> to be considered serious from large companies etc. for
> partnerships or sponsorships you need to adjust to the real
> world where they exist.
>
> Everything in this process followed the procedures as it should 100%
>
> Noone has anything to explain or be sorry about.
>
> The Capital Team had liasons to OSM and PLT and the Legal Team
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in
> the Google Groups "Joomla! CMS Development" group.
> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/joomla-dev-cms/ynZ74AHwa3E/unsubscribe.
> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
> joomla-dev-cm...@googlegroups.com
> <mailto:joomla-dev-cm...@googlegroups.com>.
> To post to this group, send email to joomla-...@googlegroups.com
> <mailto:joomla-...@googlegroups.com>.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/joomla-dev-cms.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "Joomla! CMS Development" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
> an email to joomla-dev-cm...@googlegroups.com
> <mailto:joomla-dev-cm...@googlegroups.com>.
> To post to this group, send email to joomla-...@googlegroups.com
> <mailto:joomla-...@googlegroups.com>.
--
Diese Nachricht ist ausschließlich für den/die beabsichtigte/n
Empfänger/in bestimmt. Sie enthält vertrauliche und gegebenenfalls
rechtlich geschützte Informationen. Sollten Sie nicht der/die
Adressat/in sein oder diese Nachricht irrtümlich erhalten haben, bitten
wir Sie freundlichst, sie an den/die Absender/in zurückzusenden und sie
einschließlich aller angefertigten Kopien zu vernichten. Die Weitergabe
und das unerlaubte Kopieren dieser Nachricht sind nicht gestattet.



This message is for the sole use of the intended recipient. It may
contain confidential and possibly privileged information. If you are not
the intended recipient or if you have received this message in error, we
kindly ask you to notify the sender and destroy these messages including
all copies thereof. Any disclosure or unauthorized copying of this
message is strictly forbidden.


er...@digital-garage.com.au

unread,
Nov 4, 2015, 9:09:00 PM11/4/15
to joomla-...@googlegroups.com
Hi Folks,
 
There was talk some time ago about a certification program.
 
What about differing levels of certification (integrators, template developers, extension developers) etc.  Revenue could come from  courseware, training, exams.  Then also an annual fee to to retain certification.
 
As an integrator and also having a couple of extensions in the JED I'd be willing to pay an annual fee if it meant I got a badge for my website as an "approved" Joomla integration or applications developer.  Structure the pricing based on tiers and tie it to number of employees or business revenue so you avoid only have big studios at the cost of freelancers.
 
It would raise the all round quality and kick in some funds.
 
Eric.
 
 
On Wed, Nov 4, 2015, at 06:01 PM, Ronni Christiansen wrote:
I dont think the JED can be compared to the JRD - its not just a phonebook - its actual listings for concrete extensions - those with mulltiple extensions (products) has multiple listings - so its not the company thats listed but its products.
 
An alternative model could be to have all commercial parties pay say 100 usd a year to get the right to list commercial extensions - if there is 1000 of those thats 100k of funding - which would make up for some of the lost income - the amount could be different too.
 
But in any case it would not be bad to see those with strong commercial interests who are listed in the JED and IFW already with product listings chip in to compensate for the lost banner revenues from the JED.
 
Alternative ideas absolutely welcome too.
 
@chad @gary not my table but let me share what i know: no he didnt yet because its not publicly available - its being cleared off with the partner and finalized along with the 2016 budget process - within long a new budget for 2016 should be ready (i know the process is ongoing now and all the teams and budget line items owners are contributing to that process right now - you where a part of the same process last year Chad) - To those of you who doesnt realize this then OSM has repositioned most teams back under CLT and PLT in the last 2 years including their budgets which means that for the estimated final revised budget for 2015 the OSM budget share is around 25% where as half of that goes to lawyers to defend the trademark (personally i think thats silly but thats something old leadership many years ago decided to do and its been done since) - which leaves around 10-12% of the collective budget for the remaining teams and activities under OSM. The remaining 75% or so of the budget is owned by lineitems owners in the budget from PLT and CLT and they have full control with the spending under those lineitems.
On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 8:21 AM, Bakual <werbe...@bakual.ch> wrote:
I want to adress the main misconception about IFW/JED you seem to have to prevent spending time into similar ideas in future. The JED is monetised by ads, yes. Nothing wrong with that.
But the JED by itself is NOT a commercial platform and is NOT an advertisment for extensions. It's a directory like a telephone book (for those who remember those things *g*) or the Google search. Nobody refers to those listings as advertisment. There are commercial extensions in it, yes, but there are also many, many non-commercial extensions in it. The most important point is that nobody paid anything to be listed there, the listing is free for all. Unlike the advertisment on the site which is paid.
 
That's why it is fine to show the directory in the Joomla Backend, but it's not fine to show paid advertisment in it. I hope you understand that difference.
 
Am Mittwoch, 4. November 2015 07:52:02 UTC+1 schrieb Ronni Christiansen:
Disclaimer: I am a member of the Capital Team and the JWC team and currently leading the Legal Team - and this posts is my personal opinion :)
 
I negotiated this proposal from Google and i am in no way what so ever ashamed or sad i did so.
 
The fact is that income is down from our Google Adsense income (which has been the _main_ income for Joomla for 10 years - the irony is not to be lost) by up to 65%.
 
One of the factors of this is that the install from web remote loads the JED into the backend of Joomla.
 
Doing so might be easier for people but it also heavily removes the income base which pays for codesprints, events, JET program etc. 
 
Part of the goal of the capital team is to find new sources of income and specially in this case where we could be facing a up to 40% cut in budget for 2016 compared to 2015 - it is vital that new sources of income is found.
 
  • The JED _is_ a commercial platform. (Google Adsense)
  • The Install from Web - lists - Commercial companies selling their 3rd party extensions for Joomla.
  • The Install from web is not active in the CMS - but needs to be activated.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to joomla-dev-cm...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to joomla-...@googlegroups.com.


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Joomla! CMS Development" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to joomla-dev-cm...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to joomla-...@googlegroups.com.

Leo Lammerink

unread,
Nov 4, 2015, 10:28:30 PM11/4/15
to joomla-...@googlegroups.com
Fair enough statement

Ronni Christiansen

unread,
Nov 5, 2015, 12:19:37 AM11/5/15
to joomla-...@googlegroups.com
Radek: As Sarah was not part of the talks with Google and OSM was not leading this i will try and answer in her place:

1) Multiple people from different groups has been brought into play to try and work on solutions including JED, The Marketing Team etc.
Members of the capital team also reached out to PLT / Marketing Team to get concrete data on views on the JED / IFW etc. but only partial data was available.

As part of these ongoing efforts multiple new ideas and proposals for partnerships / sponsorships has been worked on including a new banner rotation system are in test.

I dont think its a good idea to question the financial situation of Joomla in public personally so i dont think its an issue that per say requires public debate - after all its in noones interest to question the stability of Joomla.

But at the end of the day quite a lot has been worked on - but it seems to really get things moving we need more people and teams involved to get good outcomes.

2) Yes - not all people where involved in this - as i am sure in the events team not all people are involved in everything - its the same in most other teams too.

4 people was actually involved in this or related activities.

3) We dont have a precedence for involving other teams before there is something concrete on the table they can relate too.

In this case the PLT liaisons was onboarded within the capital team and then the PLT via the PLT liaison (as its normal procedure).

The PLT is not involved in the daily workings of the capital team - just as its not involved in many other teams daily work.

The PLT was onboarded in the right time as per historic cross team coodination / work etc.

I surely didnt invent the liaison system but its there for a reason.

As for involving other parties (teams / persons etc.) with ongoing negotiations thats really not something that has been done before either - those negotiations tend to be quite fragile and until you have something solid you dont really involve others.

I dont think its very healthy for the right of initiative if everything has to be processed through PLT (or any leadership) before it has a concrete form - after all we seek to enable and give power of initiative to the decentralized teams so that volunteers has the right of initiative.

4) In parts yes - see answer 1 - but its obvious for me now that to really get things moving we need more teams involved to make it happen - a cross team "action team" might be a good way to do it.

Paul: The problem is with the new JED and the IFW (and changes to it) there is no actual data that we could get our hands on for amount of views for IFW.

We did get some partial data from the JED etc. but was told there was no complete data - we asked for these numbers 2-3 months ago.

So with the information i have at hand there is no data on say the IFW.

Brian: As OSM has repositioned any team to PLT and CLT that was earlier run under OSM but did not relate to financial or legal as such OSM does not have control over those teams - before the JED rebuild and the IFW there was data on everything from Google Analytics - but i am not sure why there isnt now.

Michael: If you have any specific questions that i can answer please highlight them and i will try and see if i can answer or find an answer - as to questions on stats and data i really cant add more then i described above.

Eric: I think that would be a super idea - if you have commercial extensions on the JED and pay an annual fee you get a badge of sorts as an official 3rd party extension provider - i know that as a 3rd party dev. i would certainly also find that a good model.


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Joomla! CMS Development" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/joomla-dev-cms/ynZ74AHwa3E/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to joomla-dev-cm...@googlegroups.com.

Sully Sullivan

unread,
Nov 5, 2015, 12:52:14 AM11/5/15
to joomla-...@googlegroups.com
Hi Ronni,
 
"Assume good faith" is a cardinal rule in large-scale collaboration. I don't think you've been shown enough of that in this discussion. Thanks for your efforts on behalf of Joomla!.
 
Let me add. From your clarifications below, I can appreciate that a collaborative process was sincerely attempted, though it didn't go well. I also think it's correct that if your project is charged from leadership to do something, leadership ought to stand back and see what you come up with rather than micro-manage. And lastly, I have learned over the years of developing and integrating websites to require my customers at the outset to designate a single point of contact for most decisions, because with too many people involved timelines explode and tempers fray and work doesn't get accomplished and at the end, they blame us for their chaos and we don't get referred future business. So I don't fault the capital committee for not having a lot of community involvement and wanting some privacy during negotiations, and I believe you were investing your volunteer time in something you thought would benefit our project. Finally, thanks for being willing to absorb some process improvements.
That said--at least in my opinion third-party advertising within our products, even in optionally-activated extensions, would be too negatively disruptive to our user base, end users and Joomla!'s perception within the FOSS community. Anecdotally, after a (mildly) irate call from an early client, I learned to delete the inactive Joomla! shop banners in the /images directory that the CMS ships with (actually, all demo content there). So, can you confirm the earlier statement by Sarah that this avenue for funding has been dropped?
 
Thanks again. I&#