| 9 Apr 2024 |
 Jonas Chevalier | I think we should also make it clear that the community comes before commercial interests. That's how I think. | 11:13:29 |
 @delroth:delroth.net | I don't even think any commercial interest is impacted here in the general sense, the only argument I've seen to that effect is "oh but it makes nix unprofessional to not accept some sponsorships and not having a clearly defined policy" but that's unmeasurable and likely insignificant | 11:19:20 |
| @delroth:delroth.net | (the corporate world routinely acts on ethics when deciding to have or not have commercial relationships with other entities - just look at the twitter advertising exodus for a recent example) | 11:19:52 |
| @delroth:delroth.net | (as much as some people think companies are exclusively amorphous blobs of capitalism looking at maximizing $ short term, there are plenty of counter examples that go against this...) | 11:20:35 |
| Jonas Chevalier | Building good relationships with companies is also important for the foundation to accomplish its goals. We spent a lot of time in the negative, but this is also an important aspect to develop. | 11:22:18 |
| Jonas Chevalier | Brand is a delicate thing and a valuable asset for companies, so we also have to balance that in if we want to build good relationship with them. | 11:24:25 |
 Julien | I am fairly sure that most companies prefer to be quietly rejected than get the bad publicity of a community outcry | 11:25:13 |
| Jonas Chevalier | Indeed 😅 | 11:25:39 |
| @delroth:delroth.net | dunno, palmer luckey was happy to post about the outcry on twitter last year... | 11:25:55 |
 @piegames:matrix.org | Yeah, does not shed a good light on the company either | 11:35:46 |
 @aloisw:kde.org | In reply to @piegames:matrix.org
Yeah, does not shed a good light on the company either I'm sadly not sure this is true to a relevant extent. | 11:38:38 |
 flokli | It doesn't matter for this conversation either. | 11:51:06 |
| Jonas Chevalier | Julien: do you remember why the scope of the doc was extended from "NixCon" to NixCon and official events? | 13:29:35 |
| Julien | Probably so that other official events don't escape the policy just by naming differently than "nixcon" | 13:30:28 |
| Jonas Chevalier | ok, so the scope is NixCon-like. Not smaller events like Oceansprint. | 14:09:43 |
 @joepie91:pixie.town | I believe the whole conversation originally started on the premise of "events which are endorsed and/or supported by the foundation", for which "nixcon and official events" seems a reasonable approximation | 14:10:53 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | AIUI, events that are organized independently from the foundation and do not seek its endorsement or any perception of officialness, were never intended to be subject to a foundation-level sponsorship policy | 14:11:52 |
