When Good Agendas Turn Bad - Linux/GNU, etc

Richard Franks richard.franks at drdc-rddc.gc.ca
Wed Jan 24 18:24:32 CET 2007

On 1/24/07 6:11 AM, "Dave Crossland" <dave at lab6.com> wrote:

> Hi Sean,
> On 23/01/07, David Ford <david at blue-labs.org> wrote:
>> You must be reading a different link.  Sean's email most clearly states
>> "in the form of a user's manual that will give credit to GNU." He also
>> clearly stated "We'll just call it OpenMoko."
> Could you confirm that if FIC writes that OpenMoko is based on a
> popular free software operating system, that will be described as
> "GNU/Linux" instead of "Linux"?

Well come now, you made enough noise and then forced a direct response
out of possibly the busiest person involved in this project.. and
because someone else yanks your chain, you hit back with an even bigger


There are three sides to this discussion:

1) The side who care about their personal Agenda foremost, and will take
any and every opportunity to present their personal Agenda. Even if it
means misunderstanding or twisting nuance - because, very simply.. the
more we talk about it.. the more free advertising the Agenda gets.

2) The side which thinks that logic or reasoning or well-thought out
debate will change anything - it won't - your words will be mangled into
something which gives side #1 another opportunity to repeat EXACTLY THE
SAME THING AGAIN AND AGAIN (their Agenda), without risking accusations
of spamming blatantly.

3) The side which thinks that this bickering and ill-feeling generated
risks fragmenting our community, makes it harder for genuine questions
to be answered, associates OpenMoko with school-yard politics, and
altogether sets a rather bleak precedent. Sides #1 and #2 are equally
responsible in this scenario.

How about we let our Agenda be the cool technology and innovation


More information about the community mailing list