[FFmpeg-devel] [VOTE] please vote for our NGO name

[Diego Biurrun]

On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 11:00:39AM +0100, Stefano Sabatini wrote:
> On date Wednesday 2009-12-16 02:33:14 +0100, Diego Biurrun encoded:
> > On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 11:23:15AM -0500, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
> > > 
> > > we can't agree on a name for our fancy new non-profit org, so we want
> > > YOU to help us choose a name. Voting is open to all developers /
> > > contributors with an SVN account at svn.ffmpeg.org.
> > 
> > My vote:
> > 
> > > You can choose between the following names:
> > > * Free Multimedia Tech / freemediatech.org
> > 
> > I vote for using proper words, not abbreviations.
> > 
> > > * FFMTech (Foundation for Free Multimedia Technologies)
> > 
> > I vote for "Technology", not "Technologies".
> > 
> > > * FFmedia (Foundation for Free MultimEDIA)
> > 
> > I vote for free beer instead of free adult Flash movies.
> > 
> > > * OMF (Open Multimedia Foundation)
> > 
> > Dominik suggested a better name than this one.
> > 
> > > * FFm.org (Foundation for Free Multimedia)
> > 
> > I vote for names without top-level domains in it.
> > 
> > > * FFmpeg Foundation
> > 
> > I vote for a name not specific to FFmpeg.
> >
> > > * FFMF (Fast Forward Multimedia Foundation)
> > 
> > I vote for fast reverse on voting procedures.
> 
> Some of these objections are IMO valid, but the question is: why
> didn't they have been arised when both the names and the voting
> procedure was discussed?

1) I don't currently have time to reply to every email in realtime.
2) The objections *did* get raised, but were promptly ignored when the
   voting started, i.e. all the bad names were put up as candidates.

> I believe there has been a sufficient amount of time to discuss that
> before the voting procedure began, objecting now is quite pointless,
> also we decided to implement this voting system for the same reason
> that to make everyone happy had proven to be impossible, also we want
> this thing set up in a reasonable interval of time.

What's the hurry suddenly?  It's not as if a few days or weeks would
suddenly make a difference...

> Anyway it shouldn't be impossible to review and fine-tune the winning
> name to accomplish to some of your requests, for example:

Why not do it right in the first place?  Why repair a situation after
breaking it when there is no need to start broken?

Diego