but open source is still open source software and does not mean that services can't be charged for. indeed you can even charge for the actual software itself even if it is open source. do you not understand again? I would stop there marco before you dig an even deeper hole.

kc0maz, please get this back on track.

i definitively think it's not an honest attitude. Accusing others (e.g me) is a well know attitude.

Please, is there any forum moderator in this site?.

@Giba comment #20
More sugestions ?


Area for code snippets within the interesting Tips and other?

accused you of what? being incorrect with your definition of open-source? which you was.

Quote:

not as often as there used to be.

Quote:

The XOOPS Foundation contacted me to do the server migration because they had decided to have it professionally done and was prepared to pay for it anyways. Instead of going outside of XOOPS for a solution provider, they looked inside XOOPS first.

When approached about this job, I expressed multiple times that I did not feel comfortable charging XOOPS for my services. The representatives from the Foundation insisted that I be paid a fair wage for my work because they expected professional results.

I struck a compromise with the Foundation... I charged 50% my normal rate, which is 25% of the rate the Foundation was prepared to pay me. i.e.: I gave the XOOPS Foundation a 75% discount. Payment was only made for consulting, building, and testing the new web servers; which is the services I performed.

After my contract with the Foundation was disolved, I even went as far as to offer a refund because the contract ending prematurely. It is the stance of the Foundation that I should be paid for services rendered.

And I've got the chat and email logs to prove every last bit of it.

Considering who is doing the attacking here, I was say that this is very much a case of the pot calling the kettle black.

You better go look at the log in your eye before you point out the spec in mine.

Every other service I provided for XOOPS was for FREE. All of my designs, all of my code, the hundreds of hours babysitting this site, fixing server security vulnerabilities, bringing up crashed sites, nursing these servers and dealing with a$$holes as a moderator, trying to help newcomers, etc... Every last bit of it was done as a volunteer!

As the forum structure goes, does it really matter who got paid for what? Not really.

Xoops.org is the project site.
Xoopsinfo.com is the Community Site.

both sites are own by the XOOPS foundation.

dmaster, vaughan, marco, hervet and anyone else thinking about posting an off-topic message -- The discussion about who paid who how much for what services ends here.

If you want to discuss it further, start another topic.

Now back to our topic of the 'new and improved' forum structure. Are there any other comments or questions?

I don't think there should be a "Complaints" forum. Based on my past experience, that will encourage people to post complaints and rants, even if they would not otherwise have posted.

The "Suggestions" forum is adequate for this purpose. A complaint can always be rephrased as a suggestion, and the forum title encourages a more positive tone.