You tend to use a very broad brush when commenting on dissent. And with that very broad brush, you have yet to paint a more subtle picture illustrating how you,as community manager, help Canonical digest dissent from those around you who are not so easily brush aside as…nuts.

-Jef”My friends call me a goober..not a peanut”Spaleta

* We do value the input of users in our community. We have facilities such as brainstorm.ubuntu.com, we run surveys, do user testing and more. We strive to collect this input in a structured manner so we can help interface it to improvements via our development process.

* I am not saying I don’t care about feedback and opinion on blogs and in comments – I spend much of my life reading such feedback and striving to respond and provide input and response where I can. I also value feedback in my weekly video Q+A sessions: I don’t want to give anyone the impression I don’t care about users – as I said in my response, the whole point of Ubuntu in my mind is delivering an awesome Free Software experience for users.

* My point on the “peanut gallery” is merely that I consider the input of active contributors as typically more informed and valuable than random comments on blog entries, and as such I feel our decision-making should be driven by such contributors. I think this is an factor in meritocracy: the feedback of an active, regular contributor who has made significant and sustained contributions carries more weight in my mind than a random commentator on a blog entry.

Thanks.

Jono

Thanks for your work and leadership… best of luck going forward!

@Jef
I guess my concern about the ‘peanut gallery’ reference is that all input should be considered important. As I’m not a part of Canonical or Banshee I was unaware of who would fall into that category per Jono’s remark, off the cuff or not.

@David
I am not going to stop contributing to FOSS software. For now I’ll be keeping my Kubuntu boxes. I may work more with that group and/or swim upstream a bit.

@Jonathan
My concern is not that someone owns a Windows (I do) or Mac machine. What left me wondering about the Photoshop thing was more that it was a lack of pushing for retraining on FOSS software to do the job. If she said that his job couldn’t be done with FOSS that’s a different arguement. It was simply a lack of willingness for retraining. As for the rest of the comments involving Ivanka I found it hard to belive that the the design lead on the project could not see the similarities between what was being released and MacOS. I had non-tech friends and family see that desktop and ask me when I moved to a Mac.

For the Google/Yahoo thing I realize it was never released. It was the willingness of Canonical to make the change that concerned me.

As for the copyright, you may be correct. If so, I have yet to grasp why Canonical feels the need to own the copyright. Maybe my worry is unfounded and I hope it is, but for now I will maintain the discomfort.

@Mackenzie
I’ll put you on the list. Just remember that when you get the car, pay cash as payments make it drive slower:)

@Jono
I intend to stay a part of the community, just moving to a different participation level. I just cannot lead a piece of the community with the reservations that I have at the moment.

As for the peanut gallery comment, what I find difficult to take is that even here you describe it as those who are informed of changes and those who are not. Part of my issue is that things are moving to where it is Canonical making the decision in house then telling the community ‘this is what we will do’. No one in the community is being informed of the changes Canoncial is implementing until it is implemented as a done deal. In that light, even the most active community member (that is not a Canonical employee) is nothing more than a member of the peanut gallery given this explanation of your comment. So even if a person is outside of the community it does not mean that they cannot see a flaw in the plans.

I’m not saying that I have to agree with every decision made within the project, but when I see a systematic process that is leading in a direction that removes control from the community it grew from it is disturbing.

Another concern I have, since you brought it up, is the constant line from Canonical ‘I wish things could have been handled better’. That mantra is getting a bit tired.

It is because I am proud of where this came from that my concern for where it is going is so great.

@Stuart
You’re quite welcome. I’ll hopefully see you at the next OpenSource Maryland meeting.

My very best advice to you would be to refrain entirely from tagging individuals or groups of people with silly name calling. At best it is a low form of argument and it is highly likely to be viewed as gratuitously insulting…note Jeff’s reaction to it above. Jeff states that he saw it as a disparaging remark.

I would have expected better of you and wonder if you read the site about respect I seem to remember some Canonical employee having set up.

Jono and all the people at Ubuntu’s inner circle need to remember that it’s the peanut gallery that will be doing the bulk of the donating. These people are active with their donations because they can’t be more active with their programming or other ways. Does this make them any less important to the Ubuntu Project? IMHO the “Peanut Gallery” comment tells us how Jono really feels about the end user of Ubuntu. It was arrogant and inappropriate. I’m actually angered more now that I’ve read his explanation that when I first heard about it because now I see it for what it really is.

What is the Peanut Gallery really?

1. Its people who actively use Ubuntu.
2. Its people of that group who make donations to keep Ubuntu and other projects within Ubuntu Going.
3. It’s people who tell others to try Ubuntu to widen it’s user base and in turn get more donations.
4. Its also the people who love free stuff and never contribute in any way shape or form.

Is it really fair to label that entire group as #4??

Here is what I as a member of the Peanut Gallery would like to see.

1. A note from Jono realising that we are more than #4′s..
2. The Ubuntu inner circle to announce that it will take no more than 50% of any donations given through software included through Ubuntu.
3. If Ubuntu One is closed source (in any part of it) it should NOT use the name of Ubuntu. Call it something else. To use the name of Ubuntu is misleading at least.
4. A way for the Peanut Gallery to get more active, either through donations, or spreading the word about Ubuntu. (How about an Ubuntu Party Pack for sale that includes Ubuntu stickers and CD’s and T-shirts?)

I still support Ubuntu but I think that some of the decisions made have been misguided. Don’t give up on the core principles that made Ubuntu what it is today!

Charlie.

jono vuntz, but this isnt really anything to do with the GNOME Community – it is an arrangement between Canonical and Banshee surely? 22:49

vuntz jono: that’s negating the fact that banshee people are close to gnome people and vice-versa 22:50

chuckf From where I sit, as a member of the community, I see this as yet another ‘Community, we have the right to do this leagally so we’re doing it’ decision from Canonical 22:50

jono vuntz, agreed, but the Ubuntu community is close to the GNOME community 22:50

vuntz jono: not as close as the banshee one 22:50

jono vuntz, my only point is that the views of the peanut gallery is not necessarily a reason to change things

You’re referring to the banshee community as the peanut gallery, adding insult to injury after coming in mafia-style and taking away their money like some obtuse school yard bully. Par for course, when it comes to Canonical, though.