Christopher Sawtell wrote:
On Wednesday 29 November 2006 17:06, Gordon Findlay wrote:
Read that again: freedom is indivisible.
Indeed that's true, but the question we are debating is whether we, as a
group, wish to extend that freedom to members from whom excessively
frequent postings seem to indicate a very different and divergent point
of view of the world from that which the mainstream CLUG community
members normally see things.
Count your own?
The 'problem' for Linux groups is simply that 'getting it to go' is now
virtually as simple as falling off the proverbial log,
Bollix. It's an alien O/S, and an alien culture, to ordinary folk.
But the quality of the kernel/distro/installers means they can be given
something much more likely to be fully functional from the word go now.
Support is more required, to meet interest levels that are edging
forward, but this can be undertaken at a more basic level.
The point you need to grok is that growing the user base significantly
is the best (financial) insurance you can hope for against a patented
future, imho.
and the need for
a helping hand is no longer anything like as necessary as it was only
five years ago. Thus if new comers to Linux come to this list and hope
to find a solution to a somewhat esoteric problem and see a continuum
of postings somewhat laking in literacy skills about irrelevant
politics, they'll just unsubscribe and find the solution to their
particular problem elsewhere.
Thanks for paraphrasing me Chris, but..
My own opinion is that it is probably nearing the time for CLUG and the
linux-users list to be given a decent coup-de-grace [1] followed by a
wake [2]. For me that's a shame because I have made many good friends
because of CLUG.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coup_de_grâce
[2] a vigil held over a corpse the night before burial; "there's no
weeping at an Irish wake" ( Princeton Wordnet )
--
CS
Your destructive, irrational, and ego-centric proposal indeed shows that
the status of a list mind is in question, and that it is your own. That
attack on public interface assets - as on gnu-licensed software itself -
explains why your LUG faKtion has been neutralised.
(What the g33k-3l33t can't hack is the arcane made fully democratic?)
N.B. Thread ends with the last right-of-reply, to this attack on
democratic expression.
--
Rik
