Changing a Free extension to Paid

[sozzled]

The original question in this discussion—what happens to reviews in a JED listing if the extension is recategorised from "free" to "paid"—has been answered. The reviews are removed. That's the answer.

While the rest of the discussion has shifted into a debate about whether this is an equitable arrangement or not, the question was asked, answered and the answer has been confirmed by members of the JED team. The rest of the discussion, while it has been interesting to observe, doesn't change the answer to the simple question that was asked by @alledia to begin with.

The ongoing debate about whether or how to change things will not end here with this discussion and there's no sense in quibbling over what can, might or should be done. The rules are the rules however they were arrived at. C'est la vie!

Would someone please mark this discussion as resolved (at some point) and we can debate the efficiency, effectiveness and value of the [JED] "review system" elsewhere.

[Webdongle]

... I have only one simple question for you: when you last time voted directly, in person for the traffic regulations, for example? ...

Well we vote for the people who make those decisions. If we don't like the legislation they make we can vote for someone else.

But back on topic. A question was asked about changing a free extension to a paid one. It was answered then you claimed the rules were created as part of a diplomatic process. The point I was making they are the rules and debate about them on here makes no difference. They are what they are and peoples opinion on here makes no difference.

[leolam]

Good for us! We're ruling the JED!

Yes you are (without supervision and any input by the community i.e users/extension developers is dusted....holistic)

Leo

[webgobe]

Good for us! We're ruling the JED!

Yes you are (without supervision and any input by the community i.e users/extension developers is dusted....holistic)

Leo

I decided to not react anymore on this thread, but you are forcing me to do it. I see that you don't see the irony here. I see that you seemingly don't realize, that is a bitter humor behind those words. Or you just choose to not see...
Well, we are putting there something on the table for the community. And we are getting back nothing, just criticism, accusations, false claims... Nice.
Lucky you, that there are still (I am wondering, why, seriously) fools like us, contributing with what we have more precious - our time - to keep running this project for the benefit of the community. For enthusiast, for weekend webmasters, and for professionals like you (and me) who are able to make a living because this project is up and running still.
I am disgusted.

[Webdongle]

@webgobe
There may be some that criticise and suspect you. But that is not surprising when JED is a self elected, sef governing body. More openness by yourselves and openly discussing the operation of JED would go a long way to preventing that.

[sozzled]

The question asked by the OP relating to the consequences of re-categorising a listing on the JED—from "free" to "paid"—has been answered, as far as that matter in concerned. As I wrote a fortnight ago:

Would someone please mark this discussion as resolved (at some point) and we can debate the efficiency, effectiveness and value of the [JED] "review system" elsewhere.

The underlying issues—the simmering discontent within the J! community—about the "rules—how they were arrived at and how they are applied—remain, however. The discontent won't evaporate overnight simply because the JED team refuses to acknowledge it doesn't exist. I accept that there are differences in opinions from both sides: the opinions expressed by the community and the opinions within the JED team. I believe that both sides should be able to freely express their opinions; no-one is forcing anyone to contribute to the discussion whether or not anyone's opinion will alter the status quo.

We are all able to learn from what people write here on this forum and we're all capable of concluding whatever we want to conclude from what we read.

I understand the frustrations of the J! community with the operation of the JED. Equally, I understand the frustrations of the JED team that their efforts are often repaid by "criticism, accusations ... [or disparaging] claims". Such is the nature of technical discussion forums; it's the very nature of technical discussion forums that debates will occur and those discussions will, at times, become passionately prosecuted. However, underpinning all debates that take place in real life, we should always respect other people who have different opinions and we should try to argue the issues; we should practise tolerance and forbearance, and not attack people simply because they don't see things the same way as we do.

I am extremely disappointed with the way that some of the points made by some contributions to this discussion have been dismissed and the ways in which people—on both sides of the debate—have been mistreated. It was not a sense of "irony" (as @wegobe characterised it) that was lost on me; it was not people's "disgust". When discussions resort to sarcasm—sarcasm is the lowest form of wit—this says a lot more about people's lack of tolerance in being prepared to listen. God gave us two eyes, two ears and one mouth and we should use those faculties in that proportion. Read and listen before one opens one's mouth!

It's incomprehensible to me that, simply because someone else disagrees with someone else, one's opinions would be resolutely met with a refusal to further engage with the conversation. Conversations do not end just because someone says, "I'm having nothing more to do with this discussion." As @webgobe wrote:

... you just choose to not see...

To quote from the Good Book:

First, remove the beam out of your own eye, and then you can see clearly to remove the speck out of your brother's eye.

There are things we can learn from this discussion. Some people, however, fail to learn. As Winston Churchill observed:

"Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it."

[Webdongle]

... As Winston Churchill observed:

"Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it."

And the JED team are continuing to make the same mistakes.


He also said (in 1948 after being voted out), ""For my part, I consider that it will be found much better by all Parties to leave the past to history, especially as I propose to write that history."

That just about sums it up.

[webgobe]

The discontent won't evaporate overnight simply because the JED team refuses to acknowledge it doesn't exist. I accept that there are differences in opinions from both sides: the opinions expressed by the community and the opinions within the JED team. I believe that both sides should be able to freely express their opinions; no-one is forcing anyone to contribute to the discussion whether or not anyone's opinion will alter the status quo.

We are all able to learn from what people write here on this forum and we're all capable of concluding whatever we want to conclude from what we read.

I speak only for myself, but I must be clear on these:

1. I don't think, that the JED team as whole - and myself, as an individual - can be accused that we don't acknowledge the problems here. And also there is an IMPORTANT shift in the amount and the quality of communication in the past years. It is not perfect, of course, but important steps where made in the right direction. When I joined to JED there where no publicly available reports about the JED team's meetings, about what's happened there and what are the goals we set to ourselves. The forum's JED section was completely abandoned, and nobody from the JED team members actively monitored these and reacted to what was posted. It is not the case anymore.
2. The "self elected/self governed" bullshit. Yea. Why no one had an initiative to change this in better? Why no one raises the problem, coming out with a proposal in any of official Joomla forums? Why no one raised the subject in one of past years annual meetings? I was there... and didn't seen anything like that. You don't like the current status quo? Well, then you should make an effort to change it. Trust me, most of the actual JED members are there because they have the willingness to change things to better. They where frustrated in some point of time on how the JED worked/works. And they decided that it's time to step in and contribute with what they can to change things in better. It is bad? It is a negative thing, that there are some "self elected" people who are trying - via self governance - to make things happen? I don't know. Maybe. Maybe would be better just to stay on the sideline and criticize those who are actually doing things.
3. "There are things we can learn" - definitively. And we learn things. And we try to implement what we learned. If someone would bother to take a closer look on what's happening would see.

Generally: I think nobody is happy when tries to do something positive and is dragged down by the negative attitude of the bystanders. I don't expect to be praised for the volunteer work we are putting into this. I am just expecting to have a FAIR criticism over what WE are doing. And you can be sure, that we are LISTENING here. And we are discussing the best ideas and we are trying to implement things.

[sozzled]

Thanks for your reply, @wegobe, but I disagree with your character assessment.

1) We're not bystanders. We've invested our time and energy into the J! project and I reject the assertion that we're constant whiners, complainers, nay-sayers or critics because that's all we're capable of doing.

2) In my opinion, the JED is a proud achievement and the team has not achieved what has been achieved because of a lack of goodwill. Our appreciation of the JED has not been diminished when things haven't always gone our way. It is unfortunate that some members of the JED team feel unappreciated and have taken to this forum to accuse the broad J! community of being critical simply because we have nothing better to do with our time. The same can be said about anyone. I think you should reflect on your assessment and they manner in which you have reacted.

3) I repeat: we learn when we engage with others. We do not learn—we're incapable of learning—when that engagement ceases. In the past few years, as different parts of the J! project have distanced themselves from this forum and sought comfort in their separate places (e.g. GitHub, Glip, Google groups, etc.) it's become increasingly harder for "the average user" to find out what's going on. We live in a growing information vacuum and, because of it (perhaps) we are also frustrated. However, when we "average" users feel like outsiders or, worse, are labelled as know-nothings, we also will be more inclined to disengage.

4) I put it to you, as kindly as possible, that over time we've come to feel as unappreciated as you also appear to feel. I sympathise with your feelings but I also put it to you that we feel as though the JED team is marching to the beat of a different drum and the band is about to leave the building while the rest of us are trying to hear the music.

I hope you take my thoughts in the spirit of fairness and the best of intentions. I hope you and your fellow team members understand that we don't have the JED team in our sights in order to shoot down the good work that the JED has done. We're just hoping that you and your colleagues will listen and weigh all matters—the good and the not-so-good—and we'll all be able to work together as team players and not as the enemy.

[webgobe]

Thanks for your reply, @wegobe, but I disagree with your character assessment.

1) We're not bystanders.

I hope you take my thoughts in the spirit of fairness and the best of intentions.

I am not talking about you. But I must admit, that in most regards you are right. I might be pissed off more, than I should - I can admit that too, and here's my apologies for that. Despite on how I feel, I am here. And I am here since 2004. Not planning to leave. Not planning either to discontinue my contribution. But that not means, that I don't feel that bitter taste. Sorry. That's it.

[sozzled]

This is a good start, mate. You wrote, before, "trust me"; by the same token, I would ask you to trust the sincerity and goodwill extended by other people who have contributed to this discussion (and others like this one). Some of us are less tactful in the way we express ourselves and what they write can be misinterpreted as merely an outpouring of emotion lacking substance. I have been very careful in what I write here but sometimes we inadvertently launch missiles instead of crafting our words more diplomatically.

I believe that other contributors in this discussion also have the best of intentions: they didn't write what they wrote because their first motive was to reach for a loaded shotgun; they wrote what they wrote with the sincerest of good intentions (even if it might take a microscope to identify them). I won't mention any names but most of the criticism I've read here has been fair, albeit written with blunt crayons instead of an expensive hand-crafted fountain pen.

The Joomla! project does not benefit by a public display of righteous indignation. When the irresistible force hits the immovable object something's got to give. No-one is completely right and no-one is completely wrong and saying "that's it" doesn't achieve any cut-through; sabre-rattling only raises tension and heightened tensions can escalate into open warfare in a very short space of time.

I suggest we all take a breather, lower the emotional temperature, and relax. The issues we've discussed will still be here years from now. OK?

[Webdongle]

@webgobe
Given that you are genuine. What is your opinion of keeping (or losing) old reviews?

[webgobe]

Old reviews: I think they should fade out. We can discuss when and how, but I strongly believe that they must go, because they are getting not relevant to latest versions and for the users willing to use them.

[webgobe]

The Joomla! project does not benefit by a public display of righteous indignation. When the
I suggest we all take a breather, lower the emotional temperature, and relax. The issues we've discussed will still be here years from now. OK?

Agreed.

[Webdongle]

Old reviews: I think they should fade out. We can discuss when and how, but I strongly believe that they must go, because they are getting not relevant to latest versions and for the users willing to use them.

But do they not show a history? Such history helps show the continued (or not) good reputation.

From a my point of view (as a user) if I see a good history of an extension then it gives me confidence in a new extension of theirs that has no reviews. Surely us users should be the ones to decide if a review is relevant or not. By culling the reviews you deny us users from seeing the whole picture. An forcing us (all be it unintentionally) to see the picture that is incomplete.

[leolam]

@Webgobe, Just in case you pointed at me being a "bystander"

Lucky you, that there are still (I am wondering, why, seriously) fools like us,

I have been contributing to Joomla since 1996 on both forums and in multiple Joomla Teams and with many, many translations and more. I am one of those fools you refer to and have therefore all the rights to speak based on my own experience within the Joomla political scene and I am not even an official listed extension developer.......

Do your homework properly before posting insinuations in such case

Old reviews: I think they should fade out. We can discuss when and how, but I strongly believe that they must go, because they are getting not relevant to latest versions and for the users willing to use them.

I do agree when you would simply remove extension reviews that for instance have reviews for J1.5, J2.5, J3.x and J4.xAlpha. In those cases, I would keep only reviews for J3.x and J 4.0-up in the JED. All others are not relevant I do agree for sure

A developer can make a simple remark in his listing that she/he has been around since Joomla 1.5 or so to show continuity of his extension during Joomla evolvement)

Leo

[Webdongle]

...
A developer can make a simple remark in his listing that she/he has been around since Joomla 1.5 or so to show continuity of his extension during Joomla evolvement)

...

But that does not show the views of users about the developers products. The developer can say all sorts of good things about themselves but it is the user reviews that counts.

[leolam]

see the versions in the post @Kevin

Leo

[webgobe]

On the remove reviews subject: the only thing which can be linked somehow to the versions of the extension is the date when the comment was made, so filtering the review based on this criteria is unfortunately not feasible. The suggestion is interesting, and if was workable, I would support it fully.
Generally there are multiple causes why the current reviews system should be reworked in a healthier basis. A simple light saber cut a'la Obi Wan Kenobi is not possible. Let me enumerate couple of real world situations to see why is not a simple thing - and why all attempts to make this better have failed up to date.
1. The first one - see above: the reviews have a single piece of info you can use to link to a version of the extension.... you need to dig a lot to find out if this was made even for the version running on the current Joomla core. And then we didn't touched the more important point - if the review has been made for a recent version of the extension.
2. There where periods of history of JED when the handling of the reports related to extensions was... well, at best chaotic. As a result, we have still really useless/daunting reviews, or some revenge-reviews still up there. Check this:
- a FREE extension has got back in 2015 this review: "Too expensive for bad feautures". You can judge the value of this review... Why is still there, you can ask? Simply because there is one JED rule, which is saying that a review should be reported within X days to be checked by JED team and to have a decision if should stay or should go. Well, in this case, for various reasons the owner failed to meet the deadline AND when the review was reported the JED team of that time failed to solve the case - so the review is still there. What is the problem, you can say? Well, you can see this concrete "review" only after you see the details of the extension - most potential users don't even get there, because they aren't seeing the 5 stars in any other views....
3. Fake reviews - the JED is FULL of fake positive and negative reviews. There where real "review wars" between extension developers competing for same niche. In some times the results are still there. Past couple of years we did a pretty good job in stopping these, but the "ruins"of older wars are still there.
4. Mergers/takeovers - there are lot of extensions developed by someone, and currently continued by someone else. And I am not talking about forked extensions - from the point of view of reviews that's a clear situation. But what is the value of a review praising the customer support done years ago for a given extension developer, when the extension has been taken over by someone else? (Especially IF you know, that this was a hostile takeover, we have couple of examples.
5. Developers retired/deceased/moved to another CMS, but still having their extensions downloadable, otherwise conforming to the JED rules - so can't be removed - at least not yet...
And I am stopping here.
We don't have - JED NEVER HAD - the capacity to do a proper check of ALL extensions, ALL reviews. We are relying on couple of automated tools - like regularly checking via a bot if the posted links are still live - and ON THE COMMUNITY, on the reports received from the people. We are checking EVERY REPORT and we are giving a resolution on each of these. Yes, I know, we have couple (not too many) of tricky cases where the resolution is taking more, than the one week limit we are proposed to ourselves.
But that is simply not enough to find and to solve all the potential issues.
Definitively we don't have the resources to check one-by-one if a review has been made for the recent version of the extension - and Joomla core - or not.
And the age of review anyway does not tell you the whole story. As the age of the extension.
Let me illustrate this with a very personal example. I have in JED a little module I wrote in a hurry many years ago to solve a simple problem, and decided to publish it on the JED too. The module wasn't updated at least for 6 years for now,but works perfectly, does the simple task for what was written, and got couple of reviews over years (<5 in total). Should the reviews got for it when was first published stay or should go? Or even better, should the extension be marked as abandoned because wasn't updated for years?
Well, we need to take such decisions here. Picking the best - automated - solution is tricky. And inevitably, if you do this based on some criteria verified by a computer there will be false positives, unjustified losses too. But this mess should be solved somehow and the entire reviews and ratings mechanism should provide better info for the people seeking for an extension.
One thing is clear - we need a consensus when these decisions are taken. And this is just one problem we are facing - almost ALL JED rules have similar implications. Changing them overnight, based on an one man decision or by a small group's will MIGHT be effective, but one thing is sure, won't be democratic.
Regulating something via a democratic process is a long and painful experience. And you risk to be labeled as non-democratic during the process
So, removing the old reviews CAN BE part of the solution - can sweep out lot of problems - but also can lead to unwanted side effects. But, generally speaking, good and popular extensions, the ones maintained regularly are continuously receiving new reviews, so those won't be hurt. And that's the goal here - to promote quality, even if just by these simple actions.

[webgobe]

@Webgobe, Just in case you pointed at me being a "bystander"

Of course not. But I need yo point here a typo you made: 1996 seems to be a bit early date for me
Just kidding.

Well, I published my first contribution to Mambo in 2002 and I have a similar - but not that impressive - record as yours (the 2000+ replies in VM forum is still something, I guess). I know, that you aren't a bystander. Lazy old bear as I am I am still getting hot blooded when someone is questioning my good intentions and willingness to make good things for the community. After all I am publishing free software from long before the first GPL scheme has came out, and I have long records of working for various open source projects - to name just one, if someone still remembers dMoz - I am still proud of having 8 years of working on that project ad editor of couple of categories.
My apologies for hurting anyone's feelings who does not deserved it, but cant guarantee that I won't do the same if I am getting pissed off by a similar allegation.

[sozzled]

My apologies for hurting anyone's feelings who does not deserved it, but cant guarantee that I won't do the same if I am getting pissed off by a similar allegation.

I'm sorry but that backhanded apology is completely unacceptable. Who says someone's "feelings" deserve to be hurt? No-one deserves to be hurt!

As for not being able prevent oneself from becoming agitated over little things such as what we read on this forum, that is also not an excuse to allow one's temper to dictate one's words and deeds. If someone can't control their temper then they should stay clear of a career in public relations. Further, it is against the forum rules to sledge other users:

• Keep all commentary civil, and be courteous at all times. Constructive criticism is welcome, but insults directed towards other users or the site admins will not be tolerated. Coarse/insulting language will not be tolerated.

See? We have rules, too!

Apart from this, thanks for your explanation of the JED rules, @webgobe.

[Webdongle]

On the remove reviews subject:...

That is constructive.

1. It would surely be obvious by the age of the review that it was for an older version. Very often anyway some reviewers will reference if the version is worse or better than a previous one.

2. a FREE extension has got back in 2015 this review: "Too expensive for bad feautures". Haha, yes who takes notice of obviously stupid? But, yes, some fake reviews will not be so obvious. Is it a reason to wipe all older reviews, hhhhmm moot?

3. Same as #2

4. Cull those where the there was a take over but why wipe all older reviews?

5.
a. If the extension has not been updated (or perhaps have a system for the dev to 'wake' the system) for a given length of time then wipe it. But again why wipe all older reviews? ...

b. "Changing them overnight, based on an one man decision or by a small group's will MIGHT be effective, but one thing is sure, won't be democratic."
Then have an open discussion ...

c. "I have in JED a little module I wrote in a hurry many years ago to solve a simple problem, and decided to publish it on the JED too. The module wasn't updated at least for 6 years for now,but works perfectly, does the simple task for what was written," How many in JED have extensions and how many Don't?
...
d. "But, generally speaking, good and popular extensions, the ones maintained regularly are continuously receiving new reviews, so those won't be hurt. And that's the goal here - to promote quality, even if just by these simple actions." Then a cut off point of how long? And would that then be deleting on a daily bases to keep the cut off point the same time period?

[webgobe]

Well, I just wanted to show that there are several types of situations to take in consideration when deciding whether to keep or get rid of older reviews. I did not tried to argue for or against any of scenarios, I just tried to sparkle a discussion here and to show the type of dilemmas we are facing. Things can be left as they are, it is a kind of "solution" too, but I think we should aim for better. So we need to prepare for some changes. As for when this should happen? Personally I think that the launching of JED4 would be the best opportunity to make some cleanup. And the JED4 also should provide a better support for handling this problem. Just my thoughts. But any idea posted here or arriving via any other channels will end up in a JED meeting agenda. That is what I can promise.

[Webdongle]

That is a good step towards being open. Now we need others to put their points of view. Then, when a decision is made, post it. That will help stop some of the negative comments.

[webgobe]

That is a good step towards being open. Now we need others to put their points of view.

That's what I try to do here. On my own, I have no mandate for this. And I don't want to become kind of "voice" of JED. But I think I am not alone with my ideas and thoughts.

[Webdongle]

... I don't want to become kind of "voice" of JED.

But you are a voice of reason. What is needed are more members of JED being as open.