[LAU] poll : Advertising vs Linux Audio

Patrick Shirkey pshirkey at boosthardware.com
Mon Apr 23 23:46:20 UTC 2012

On Mon, April 23, 2012 2:15 pm, Robin Gareus wrote:
> Patrick,
> another long reply. please bear with me..
> On 04/22/2012 03:45 PM, Patrick Shirkey wrote:
>> I think you seriously underestimate the amount of money that could be
>> earned by accepting advertising across the LAO channel. Let alone across
>> the entire Linux Audio community.
>>> If you have a viable business plan, we're all ear.
>> Well apparently this is a change of heart ;-)
> not really. I like the idea to support developers or musicians. It's
> just that advertising and SEO on linuxaudio.org is not the right way to
> do this. I was thinking of "business plans" in general not ads in
> particular.
> There were a couple of initiatives on the table a while back. e.g. merge
> with and become part of the linux-foundation - similar to what
> linux-printing/open-printing did. The linux-foundation has experience
> with handling funding, supporting developers and properly taking care of
> bureaucracy.
> There's actually quite lot of linux-audio projects, devs and users that
> accept donations or even make a living by selling services or products.
> Yet, personally I don't have any clue how linuxaudio.org can directly
> support those. IMHO the knowledge-exchange on LAD and LAU lists as well
> as LA conferences, teaching newbies, etc is what linuxaudio.org does
> best. It's not a business plan per se, though.
> A linux-audio-record-label, sponsored music-contests, video-promos etc..
> would be much more suitable for the latter.  Yet someone needs to take
> up that task -- I do prefer the avantgarde-like concerts featured at LAC
> and that's where my time and efforts go. If someone has incentive to do
> sth focused on musicians or other LA interest groups, the consortium is
> usually very open to proposals and does support viable initiatives.
> Keep in mind that a viable plan for the community must enable the
> community to grow and not restrict them (and that includes granting
> contributors the freedom to be not bothered with ads on the community
> site itself - although compromises can be made as long as they're
> according to LAO policy).

Which in this case doesn't actually exist hence the reason I initiated the
discussion on the consortium mailing list in the first place.

>>>> So a policy that sets clear guidelines is completely out of the
>>>> question?
>>> Dunno, that's a question for the management board, not me.
>> And I have already put it to the board several times.
> And you got answers - most recently by the director of the linuxaudio
> Management Board himself just before you approached LAU on 04/21/2012
> 11:29 PM CEST Ico wrote:
> "... based on the majority of the consortium members the current
> linuxaudio.org site will remain ad-free." [1]

And I queried why it is his decision to make that call. There was not
official vote. Just a finger in the air based on a few negative answers
from a total of four people.

>> These items have already been discussed and I provided options which
>> would
>> allow us to progress.
> No, you did not. You simply suggested move to a different [paid by ads]
> host, which is not a smart idea given the infrastructure we have (see
> below).

My suggestion was to move a couple of the subdomains specifically


To a different server so that they would be able to host paid ads and
there would be no conflict with the requirements that vt.edu place on
content hosted on their own servers.

Given that Daniel maintains the dns for the domain and that is hosted on
an entirly different server again there is no conflict with the vt.edu

However it seems that some people feel that vt.edu now owns and controls
the linuxaudio.org domain and therefore anything to do with it is subject
to the vt.edu policy. Which I assume also includes this mailing list.
Which is strange as originally this mailing list was not setup to be at
the control of vt.edu policy and neither was the linuxaudio.org domain or
for the matter the Consortium.

IMO there is some confusion about what ICO's role as a member of VT is,
the restrictions that vt.edu place on linuxaudio.org and the role of the
consortium in regards to maintaining it's remit.

> Also your way of approaching the consortium is - at best - questionable.
> I think you owe Ico an apology for your offensive phrases and
> questioning his authority in [2].
> Also migrating content away from lau.linuxaudio.org - a domain intended
> for linux-audio USERS (that you just happen to be curating) - to a .COM
> domain without asking the community at large and completely deleting the
> content from the linuxaudio.org server after the site has been migrated
> speaks volumes.

Considering this is not the first time that I have been subject to
barriers being placed in my way in regards to the direction of lau guide
and the quicktoots whcih are both sites I founded prior to linuxaudio.org
even existing and which I clearly stated before moving them to the still
freshly brewed portal when there were only a couple of other things going
on there I decided in my infinite wisdom that it was better to move them
somewhere that was less restricting and not subject to the policy of an
institution that should not be able to put barriers in my way.

Ico had already stated quite clearly that he though t it was appropriate
for me to redirect to the new server so I did.

> I can completely understand that the consortium does want not continue
> this discussion nor put this issue on the agenda (again).
> [1]
> http://lists.linuxaudio.org/pipermail/consortium/2012-April/002089.html
> [2]
> http://lists.linuxaudio.org/pipermail/consortium/2012-April/002092.html

So irrational prejudice is considered to be an acceptable method of
forming a consensus. Is this an Academic approach to business in general?

More information about the Linux-audio-user mailing list