> > > > Well, that depends what Rik is trying to do with the CLUG. Frankly, I > > don't really understand his posts. Nevertheless, he is open to the > > accusation of trying to reshape the CLUG for his own business interests. > > (I'm not saying this is his intention. I don't know what his intentions > > are. Merely that he is open to this accusation) > > Please confirm when that 'opening' has been closed thanks Carl. > > <angrymode> > > Frankly, I don't understand how you could be stupid enough to repeat this > line, again. > > </angrymode> > > To make such statements, you need backing evidence, which will be difficult > for you as there is none. > > I'm doing exactly what you are - walking out on our group's committee for > its (advocacy & public support) inaction, rather than do worse - stick > around and pose as being active. [see committee archive] > > But I won't be walking as far as Jason Greenwood had to, though sharing > precisely his understanding of C*UG. I am at full peace with what C*UG is, > and it is you, more than anyone, who has helped me comprehend it clearly. A > technical Q&A list is a fantastic support to learners & technicians alike, > and I'm so humbled to be here. Thanks. > > My objective, as Jason's is/was - separate to C*UG list's fine role - is to > build a functional (advocacy & public support), in the flesh, User Group. > And there's no way to insist anyone else should want to do that, on or off > list - so why would a rational person go down that road?
I know of no better advocates than the people on this list, and many of them advocate each and every day in their chioces of software, their discussions with others, the recommendations they make to colleagues. participation in installfests (and the surrounding publicity), by giving the message to retailers that they won't buy bundled windows software, by explaining those choices to retailers, by telling their boss that they do not need to spend money on windows to producxe a file/email/web server and so on and so on. OTOH some do not have the time or inclination to be involved at any more than a technical level. If you want more effective advocacy and support then get out there and advocate and support, and if you need a group to hold your hand then form a group (although there are plenty of people in this group who would also like to see and be part of more advocacy). And if that advocacy increases your turnover, or mine, or anyone elses then thats great too. What I am missing is the answers to the following: (1) why you seem to need to denigrate others and criticise those who do not share each and every one of your aims and ideals. Take a chill pill Rik (2) what you propose that a group (no matter who makes it up) should be doing (and do not say "support and advocacy" - give concrete real world examples please). > > I think your statements have most to do with your own fear/s, and you need > to address them. > > >> We need to encourage people to make a living from Linux. > > > > Sure. In an ethical way. > > Ok, we'd have to know what is being done unethically then. Promoting & > supporting Linux - while stating that it is mostly Open Source by codeline > quota - is blameless, is it not? > > > Extending GPL software and selling it as your own might make you a > > living, for example. > > Good option, and good luck to all those trained to advance it. Any way in > which I can put my business resources behind such ventures, I will. It > sounds like a very good plan, in fact. Thanks again. Supporting the users > would pay my bills, and give coders ongoing work. > > > Rik's posts simply are not clear enough for me to understand. Perhaps > > others fare better. > > I hope this has been sufficiently plain. > > > Cheers, > > Carl. > > Regards, > Rik. > > -- > Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ -- Nick Rout Barrister & Solicitor Christchurch Contact details at http://www.rout.co.nz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
