Linuxandmain

[Zoki, mailinglist account]

> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : linux-users-admin at linux-sxs.org
> [mailto:linux-users-admin at linux-sxs.org]De la part de Kurt Wall
> Envoye : mardi 28 mai 2002 13:34
> A : linux-users at linux-sxs.org
> Objet : Re: Linuxandmain
<snip>

> > I find it a strange point of view for a site that is Linux oriented and
> > which apparently is very pro-software patents...
>
> I find free software monotonality very strange. And tiresome, boorish, and
> intellectually shallow. The proposition that someone who is pro-Linux
> cannot also support, or at least be open to the discussion of, software
> patents


*** So the choice is given to a chosen view to prevent others in the near
future from choosing what they want to... choose!?

One of Linux strong points being the community spirit, I think peoples
choices to use this system are based partly on its technical supremacy and
partly on the community spirit which allows great things to be a achieved.

As far as I understood, the Linux community is *against* patents in any
form.
A Linux site, by definition, represents the community, not an individual and
thusly can not act as a representative of the said group and have opinions
which are against its point of view. This will otherwise discredit the group
as a whole.

What can your arguments against patents and its bad influence be when your
representatives are either openly going the same way (Red Hat) or sleeping
with the devil (Linuxandmain)?


>(which does not equate to "non-free software," by the way)
> contravenes one of Linux's most basic themes: CHOICE. News flash: having
> CHOICE means I can choose not to adopt the free software party line.


The difference of approach is the "I" in the last phrase. I was looking at
the issue more from a "we" point of view...

As I said, we are not talking about an user, we are talking about a Linux
site, an institution if you want. It represents more than one user. So in
that context it has a function of representing what the community, not "a
user" stands for.

I do not think it has anything to do with liberty of choice but with
principals and having a clear agenda.

Cheers,
Zoran.