Layout the accusations: 1) I'm supposedly rebranding GL, but I'm actually packaging and distributing a lot of OSS technologies. In order to completely satisfy that accusation, I've simply changed the badging to be "Hosted by MindFab." Is that okay? 2) I'm supposedly taking credit, but I've put links to GL on the site from the beginning. To make it even more obvious, I've added a credits section to the site so there's no doubt. 3) I'm supposedly leaching, but I've contributed fixes, themes, and user support and have spent a lot of time and effort to push GL more into the mainstream. That's all stuff that's been done to make sure there's no shadow of a doubt that I support this effort. What other accusations are there left that I can take care of? I'll do what's in my power, I'm well within the pale of OSS roles as a distributor, but at some point the unfounded attacks need to stop.

I've never made that claim and have explained myself ad nauseum about the mainstreaming, support, and yes marketing purposes of aggregating a bunch of OSS technologies in one service. If I was trying to be sleazy, I would have ignored you from the beginning and tried to evade the issue.

Once I read your comment, I added a GL link to the site. I wasn't attempting to avoid attribution. The purpose of the site was not to promote GL, but rather training. That said, when I delivered the class, I gave them a rundown on GeekLog and showed them what it could do. I told them exactly where to find it, what its name was, how it worked to help manage sites and get them set up fast. I used it as *one* example of what people were doing with PHP/MySQL to promote PHP/MySQL and why its good technology. So, I promoted GL by name during the course I taught on PHP/ MySQL even though that wasn't at all the thrust of the course. Just wanted you to know that.

I've also contributed my modifications made to Simple Orange to get the Chalk Talk theme. It's downloadable on mindfab.com along with numerous other customizations I've made to various themes.

Lcox said: >>. If I was trying to be sleazy, I would have ignored you from the beginning and tried to evade the issue.<< In truth if you were trying to be sleazy, what you would do is exactly what you are doing. You would try to spin sleaziness so that the naive might accept it as good. This is precisely what sleazy folks do when they are caught. Clinton absolutely did not have "sexual relations" with that woman. It was just a misunderstanding---until the purple dress showed up. THEN all the spin stopped because even the simplest people knew the truth. We are just still in the spin phase here. Everyone knows the truth, but there is no purple dress. By making small changes here and there to your site, putting a few themes up and making a few empty claims of releasing code to the community, and by publicly stating you didn't have "relations with that woman," one might artfully claim one was not lying. But the page was pretty obvious, Icor. There reason this sort of behavior matters is that it is false. We perhaps cannot stop you, but if we were to allow it to happen with impunity, without calling what it is, we might well end up cutting our own throats. The Geeklog gods may simply stop the good weather and bountiful seasons - since we are by implication claiming to produce them ourselves.

>>lcox said: 1) I'm supposedly rebranding GL, but I'm actually packaging and distributing a lot of OSS technologies. In order to completely satisfy that accusation, I've simply changed the badging to be "Hosted by MindFab." Is that okay?<< That's fine (though I have not revisited your site). But you only made these changes because we stomped you here. You act as if the accusations had no merit at all - and that is just a bunch of spin, playa. >>lcox said: 2) I'm supposedly taking credit, but I've put links to GL on the site from the beginning. To make it even more obvious, I've added a credits section to the site so there's no doubt.<< You put the links on the site, granted. But your initial "Made with Mindfab" completely obliterated the significance of those links. Your recent "clarifications" were made only because of the anger you have seen here. I'm happy you've changed (though I have not seen these changes). That says a lot about you - a lot of good things. But you must remember that those changes occurred because of pressure. The accusations against you had merit. >>3) I'm supposedly leaching, but I've contributed fixes, themes, and user support and have spent a lot of time and effort to push GL more into the mainstream.<< Riiight, and you did all of this from the goodness of your heart - like the real developers of "Mindfab" do every freekin' day. Give me a break, guy. You gave this "support" for money and you are pushing GL into the "mainstream" for money. That's cool, but don't go running around here acting as if your prime motive is to do us all a favor. Its just more stinkin' spin. And your themes were given very recently - in response to criticism. That is great. Give more. I assure you, if I make any claim about your work, I will NEVER claim I made it. Lcox said: >>That's all stuff that's been done to make sure there's no shadow of a doubt that I support this effort. What other accusations are there left that I can take care of?<< That's up to you. I would ask you to consider the feeling you would have had you stayed up till 3:00AM very many mornings working on a project that you want to give to people so that you can see them use it and see your creation spread, and then all of a sudden you started to see your product showing up over and over again with the claim "made with Barfbag" on it. You would not like it at all. The Geeklog guys may not say anything against it, but it could not have been pleasureable for them to see what you were doing. >>I'll do what's in my power, I'm well within the pale of OSS roles as a distributor, but at some point the unfounded attacks need to stop.<< Yeah. I really don't give a **bleep** about the pale of OSS and any other kinda pale. I'm talking just plain decency. If folks are gonna let us have use of something great, the very least we can do is not lie - not even get close to lying - by claiming we created what they in fact created. I'm gonna stop now. I'm not interested in hurting you. I hope you do a good business.

Geez everyone, CALM DOWN. Don\'t start a flame-war here. 1) You have notified creators of Geeklog to a potential \'issue\' 2) We all think it\'s great Geeklog is spreading -- the more the merrier! 3) If any kind of GNU is being violated, let the Geeklog guys take care of it. After all, if Geeklog spread by fairly honest means, we should all be cheering. Pretending to be something you are not usually comes back to bite you, especially in the development world. These guys will get their due if they are misrepresenting anything. Any semi-intelligent client would figure out it\'s Geeklog!

and according to GPL, they are not doing anything wrong. Nor was it ever attemepted to do anything wrong.

well, intentional or not when this thread was started, the changes have already been done on their site and contribution efforts are made.. forums serve a better purpose when it is used constructively (for building, improving) rather than destructive. If topics of such are to be discuss, I think it\'s best to be in the clear than to be a shadow hurling insults on one that you can identify.. that shows the level of responsibilities and openess one can assume.. \"Opensource\" now has a new meaning besides software..

I'm with Icox - for this kind of thing to grow and spread, it has to be packaged and passed on to the kind of users that don't understand all the complex and technical issues but want a good, working website. I should know - I'm one of them, converted to Geeklog by a friend and not looking back to my old websites. And I'll contribute what I can along the way, too. Good work, Icox.

nteresting discussion on what is legal or not and who is spinning or not. Looking at GPL, LCox has not violated any law, but was really guilt-tripped by that anonymous guy.

As for me, I really don't like an anonymous person--especially one admittedly contributed nothing--to speak like a big boss. This guy is a real spinner; he played with the tender conscience of LCox so well. Plus, he could neither control his anger nor his language. Well, the spin stops here!

One thing we can benefit out of this conversation might be to continue the discussion about how to market Geeklog based sites, just as LCox has revealed that he wasn't quite successful in doing that. Maybe we should start a new thread with that topic.

I started out being hired by a non-profit organization to develop and maintain their web site and as I was looking for a core engine, I stumbled into GL. Now, since the economy has been bad, they cut my hours and I was trying to find a way to fill the income gap (for the time being, I am living on my home equity also) by using this wonderful piece of software to develop sites for others. But I have not found a successful route. Small companies don't need such complex site, and bigger companies have their own web developers. Individuals can't afford our time, and I ended up developing for them free.

The guy at WebBadass.com has got some nice clients. Don't know how he markets it.

Think this will be an interesting topic?

Sam