Provide a list of paid vB add-ons at vB.org?

[MJM]

Provide a list of paid vB add-ons at vB.org?

No - Do not list any paid add-ons - except made by vB.com

Yes - Limited listing. Must have provided free .org add-ons / meet specified criteria.

Yes - List all paid vB add-ons that meet a specified criteria

This poll is to get an opinion on whether vB.org should provide a very basic listing of paid (commercial) vB add-ons.

Suggestions

Paid addons could be submitted to vB.org staff or through usergroup status. Eligibility would be determined by a specified criteria.

The listing would include a non-endorsement disclaimer, provide no support, and no reviews.

Some thoughts ...
It is hoped that vB.org might already be developing an improved 'directory' of free add-ons provided at .org (???)
This may or may not provide more links/exposure to .org contributors websites > paid add-ons.

It is not known at this time to what extent or what types of free or paid add-ons that vB.com may be providing in the future, and whether they consider a paid add-ons listing at vB.org as a conflict of interest.

[Lizard King]

I voted for Yes again because we must be able to see every modification listed instead of checking signatures etc . Also if there will be a list i wish members can post feedback about authors support perfonmance , quality of the script etc..

[Marco van Herwaarden]

Don't you think this topic has been covered from all sides enough now? Is it really needed to start again a new thread about this?

[Paul M]

Yawn .... another 'paid' vote ....

[MJM]

Thanks for voting!
Though additional ideas and suggestions are welcome ...

This poll is primarily to determine if a very basic listing might be acceptable - providing at minimum, a listing based on specific criteria for inclusion, by Category, Title, Description and Link ...

Without a positive consensus on this fundamental request, all other wishes are a moot point.

---------------------

MarcoH64 wrote

>>Don't you think this topic has been covered from all sides enough now?

Yes! What a relief. Now we can vote on just one core point of this complicated issue.

Is it really needed to start again a new thread about this?

Yes, because a new poll requires starting a new thread.

[Talisman]

NO again. How many times do we have reintroduce the exact same debate all over again? Create a dozen new polls to complicate this even more... it still won't matter. The vB.org site is an important non-profit, non-commercial website for vB users who wish to share expertise/modifications with no commercial advertising. Those of you who want to sell hacks need to advertise your commercial projects somewhere else.

It doesn't work to co-mingle "not-for-profit" AND "commercial" enterprises together at the same place.

Take a look the next time you go to a public library. Do they have to provide free advertising space inside their facility where every retail bookstore in the area can advertise their shops or their merchandise for free? No they don't -- furthermore, they're not allowed to. That would be a serious conflict of interest for the library and it puts all their efforts at cross-purposes. They would be doing a disservice to their patrons and to the community they serve if they did.

Go to your local thrift shop, donation center, or any other non-profit organization that's run by volunteers. Ask them if they'll let you advertise there for all the retail department stores in your area who want to sell furniture to people through this non-profit organization... without even paying them for the advertising space. They won't do it... NOT because those retail goods/services shouldn't be advertised at all... and NOT because those businesses don't deserve to get paid for the products they sell ... but simply because that's not the service they were put there to provide. This really doesn't go both ways.

Keep rephrasing the same old question again and again, the answer needs to stay: NO SOLICITING at vBulletin.org.

[The Geek]

Then what? Another poll on the different ways to do whatever comes out of this one? If another poll were to be done, it would just make sense to list as many options as one could think of, I dont think this one is progressing the issue further than the other poll.

Just my thoughts

[Lizard King]

Originally Posted by The Geek

Then what? Another poll on the different ways to do whatever comes out of this one? If another poll were to be done, it would just make sense to list as many options as one could think of, I dont think this one is progressing the issue further than the other poll.

Just my thoughts

I agree but i'll vote "Yes" till Jellsoft will supply a paid modification links directory

[Revan]

I voted Limited Listing. I would like to expand this option into "Must have contributed with a certain number of free hacks, and have a certain number of installs". An "Advanced Coder" or above should be able to have his paid mods listed, due to the fact that this shows an user as having a good surplus of ideas (or the ability to meet users' requests), and the number of installs would indicate that this isn't x number of 1 line plugins (no offense, Zachery ).

I think this poll does serve a purpose the other did not, as this is more specified, and a more precise question in the poll.

[akanevsky]

Originally Posted by Revan

I voted Limited Listing. I would like to expand this option into "Must have contributed with a certain number of free hacks, and have a certain number of installs". An "Advanced Coder" or above should be able to have his paid mods listed, due to the fact that this shows an user as having a good surplus of ideas (or the ability to meet users' requests), and the number of installs would indicate that this isn't x number of 1 line plugins (no offense, Zachery ).

I think this poll does serve a purpose the other did not, as this is more specified, and a more precise question in the poll.

Same here.