As always, John, you are the voice of reason, and I respect your opinion highly.
On that token, I would like to formally apologize to Terry. I took the low road myself, and although there are reasons which I didn't go into during this conversation, I should have been more diplomatic in my approach. I still feel that adopting Windows solutions to Linux deficiencies is an answer which spells disaster, but I all too often forget that most people simply aren't programmers. David John Hebert wrote: >David, > >At one point in time, I would have agreed with your >viewpoint; although I wouldn't have picked a fight >with Terry as he is the nicest guy you could ever >meet. > >I've mellowed out a bit since then and realized that >Linux is already competing with Microsoft Windows on >technological merit and doesn't need me to appeal to >someone's sense of morality or fairness. Wake up and >look around; Linux is doing just fine. > >I think you need to mellow out as well. Let me use an >example: Say we are in a big room and everyone there >is participating in a discussion about Linux >primarily, but computer technology in general; and the >conversation turns to timeshifting and PVRs. Terry >then mentions that he will be giving a presentation >soon about that very topic, though it will be done >using Microsoft Windows instead of Linux. It would not >be good manners to then interject that his statement >was irrelevant to the conversation. > >I've always thought of this mailing list as just a >big, on-going coversation, primarily focusing on >Linux, but certainly not restricting anyone from >mentioning other computer related topics or questions. >I also like to think of this mailing list as a place >where freedom is held to be an important value. >Freedom is a two-edged sword, by the way. If I value >the freedom to speak about and use Linux, I must also >respect the freedom of others _not_ to do so. >Insisting that this mailing list stays only on the >topic of Linux seems to run counter to the notion of >freedom to me, but again, you are free to illuminate >me otherwise. Sure, we may stray, but the usual >response is to simply not respond, as Terry suggested. > >I think Solaris has always been a relevant topic here, >and it certainly was not (is not?) free software. Can >we mention Solaris? What about OSX? Is that offlimits >too? Java? What about BSD, since Microsoft uses that? >Perhaps we should come up with a list of acceptable >topics... > >Can you see the absurdity of this perspective? Again, >I can sympathize with your viewpoint that we should >support free software, but each supports that effort >in his or her own manner (again, the two-edges of >freedom). Linux doesn't need policemen. It needs more >contributing coders to make it better, not more >enforcers to make it politically correct. Linux should >compete only on technological merit with Microsoft >Windows for dominance; anything else IMHO would be a >perversion of the very freedom that made it possible. > >Please, if I am in error, I welcome your effort to >inform me. But let's keep it civil and polite. Written >conversation like this can (and has many times) be >misinterpreted as mean-spirited and personal. Let's >try to keep this on-going conversation enjoyable, >otherwise this community suffers. > >John > >
