[Villages] [Projectleiding] Sponsor policy change proposal

[Juerd Waalboer]

konmei skribis 2022-07-13 23:40 (+0200):
>Recognizing spam/commercial pages: please let us know if 
>you notice. Then we can clarify. I personally am German, I 
>simply don't know most of the companies.

If I understand correctly, there is no need to know the company to which a village is associated, because the thing is upheld that sponsor villages and non-sponsor villages have equal privileges - which in this case means they are all allowed to use the website field for for-profit branding.

>Reg. the deleted village: I am not sure how team:villages 
>was involved in the discussion.

As far as I know, Team:Villages was not involved in the discussion at all.

It was just an example of community fallout, in this case that an orga member could be enforcing rules that appear to exist but should not be enforced, quite possibly because they agree with the rule and didn't like the spam - but I haven't confirmed with them that this is the actual reason.

>We would appreciate if you could just ask us next time

I was not involved in deleting the page either, though I admit I would have liked to do so.

Instead, I wanted to first await how PL wants to deal with it. In the meantime this happened.

>URLs: I don't mind to hide the field, if it is empty. 

Unfortunately, PL (per Tom) has indicated that this course of action would be inappropriate.

But the question was about the villages overview, i.e. the table.

>(Although I am not sure if that really helps the addressed 
>problem.)

By itself, it does indeed not. The suggestion to hide the field was because someone at RevSpace who made a village page, and who had been following the discussion on IRC, declared that basically the only reason they had filled out that field, was that it felt weird to keep it empty if it wasn't hidden. (They have proceeded to remove the link to their website because they felt it was inappropriate, even though it's a non-profit organization *and* sponsor related. That is another kind of community fallout from the discussion that has come to life. Please note that I have not suggested that they do this; personally I think it is perfectly reasonable to have some kinds of branding by sponsors and ideologically compatible non-profit organizations.)

The suggestion to hide the website links from the list of villages also by itself does not address the problem, but since this is the bit Tom had responded positively to and wanted your opinion about, it's still in the air. I'm still up for applying that change if your team agrees with it, but for all I care we now just ignore it, because the underlying issue doesn't seem to have any chance of getting resolved before the event anyway.


Regards,

Juerd