[OSGeo-Discuss] Proposal for the listing of projects in our new web site

[Jody Garnett]

I already changed it from number to the size thing.

This list was for support providers (since the website is about outreach
looks at projects, local chapters and service providers).

GeoForAll labs and academic / research outreach are in slightly different
spot (we could cross link). See
http://osgeo.getinteractive.nl/geo-for-all-labs/

I do not think public:government, NGO/non-profit would like to be contacted
for commercial support :) That said they can be listed in our site as
partners and friends. Sort order is given to groups with a defined
relationship with OSGeo (such as ISPRS, LocationTech,...). See
http://osgeo.getinteractive.nl/partners/

Recognizing service providers on our website in this way is a new thing - I
hope it works out :)

This design is full of difficult decisions thanks for contributing to the
discussion (and content).

On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 3:30 PM Jeff McKenna <jmckenna at gatewaygeomatics.com>
wrote:

> Hi Jachym,
>
> Yes I agree, it is a slippery slope that once we/OSGeo decide that size
> is an important part of our organization (as you know, many other
> organizations separate their membership by size), it opens up so many
> other challenges.  For that reason, I spoke up here to suggest that we
> avoid all that, by suggesting 4 options to cover that.
>
> Indeed my proposal does include all organizations, purposely.  OSGeo is
> built on that, and has done an amazing job in creating a thriving
> community.
>
> Thanks for listening Jachym,
>
> -jeff
>
>
>
> On 2017-08-21 6:17 PM, Jachym Cepicky wrote:
> > Hi Jeff (all)
> >
> > currently, the page is listing "service providers"  - it's project
> > oriented (as providing services to projects)
> >
> > your proposal is shifting it little bit to "all organisations", not even
> > service providing - but what is their releationship to the (osgeo)
> > projects? - still, it would be fine to me
> >
> > I would be +1 for it, if it's does not hit to some other principle,
> > already hardcoded in the page (e.g.
> > http://osgeo.getinteractive.nl/initiatives/geo-for-all/ is partly
> > coreving the Academic/Research topic - just an example of potencial
> > conflict, which we could oversee)
> >
> > I do not know, just noting, I have no strong opinion - I want to be
> > inclusive, all for adding another categories, but the rules and
> > principals should be clear. Currently, how I understand it "you can be
> > listed as long as you are providing services to projects"
> >
> > J
> >
> > út 22. 8. 2017 v 0:11 odesílatel Jeff McKenna
> > <jmckenna at gatewaygeomatics.com <mailto:jmckenna at gatewaygeomatics.com>>
> > napsal:
> >
> >     On 2017-08-21 5:11 PM, Jody Garnett wrote:
> >      > For your page
> >      > http://osgeo.getinteractive.nl/service-providers/opengeolabs/ Is
> >     that a
> >      > single consultant (you!) or a company?
> >      > (or perhaps it is just a company with one person in it)
> >      >
> >
> >     Hi Jody,
> >
> >     Regarding separating the OSGeo community by size, I suggest that we
> >     avoid offending our community members, so let's stay positive and
> make
> >     the following change:
> >
> >     I recommend that we/OSGeo change the "Organization Type" section to
> >     contain the following 4 options:
> >
> >        1. Private
> >        2. Academic/Research
> >        3. Public/Government
> >        4. Non-profit
> >
> >     The same 4 options should be applied to the options in the "Filter"
> >     search on the site for "Service Provider Type".
> >
> >     Thanks.
> >
> >     Jachym: you did a great job on the OpenGeoLabs page, and thanks for
> >     supporting OSGeo all of these years :)
> >
> >
> >     -jeff
> >
> >
> >
> >     --
> >     Jeff McKenna
> >     President Emeritus, OSGeo Foundation
> >     http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Jeff_McKenna
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

-- 
--
Jody Garnett
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20170821/25224939/attachment.html>