alledia wrote:
I'd recommend making Joomlacredits optional in the same way that linking to Joomla is optional. However, given Joomla's huge reach, even if 5% of people use it, thats a flood of 10,000s of genuine links for developers.
Certainly...I was just making the point that if your talking about "penalizing" developers who freely donated their time and effort to provide components for people to build sites, than the same logic should hold for website owners who take from those developers and don't credit them.

Quote:
#2 ... after pondering this, I think you're right. A visible link as opposed to a hidden link is the core issue.
Precisely. Hidden links are sneaky and should not be published... Actually, I will make one exception, if the output of a program is "hidden" than links in that output are acceptable, not wanted, but acceptable.
As examples of that:
A component that generates RSS feeds from a site and places a "powered by xyz.com" in the feed. Technically, it is "hidden", but since the website owner specifically requested hidden output...
The other is components used to generae meta tags adding their own meta tag of "meta tags powered by..." - again, if you asked for hidden tags, you should be checking them(though I think ArtioSef takes it too far with their advertisements...
Naturally, the only way to "penalize" a developer is to not use his products. Just like the only way to "penalize" a site owner is to refuse to answer his questions.
But it would be nice if there was some flag that could be flipped in the extentions directory for extentions which self promote, and ones that self promote in a sneaky way.