Re: Call for logo -- GNOME Asia Summit
On Tue, 2007-11-27 at 23:34 +0800, Emily chen wrote: > A LOGO FOR GNOME ASIA SUMMIT > > All ideas and propositions are welcome. We suggest the following basic > principles : > > * Asia specific feature > * the logo related to GNOME or gnome > * simple > Send your logo and interpretation to : [EMAIL PROTECTED] . > > This logo will not only be used in GNOME Asia Summit - Beijing 2008, > but also be used in the following GNOME Asia Summits. It is a great > honor if your logo get accepted in GNOME Asia Summit. Would you fly the winner to the first GNOME Asia Summit?! :D > -Emily -- behdad http://behdad.org/ "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." -- Benjamin Franklin, 1759 ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: two questions for candidates
> Microsoft isn't defending OOXML under the terms defined by ISO. So we should be as grubby and corrupt as them? What I am saying here is not that we should put up a weak fight. I am saying we should *defeat* OOXML under the terms defined by ISO. I'm helping to do that in Australia. It is in the local standards bodies that the fight exists now. Not on the GNOME Foundation mailing list. > > Software Freedom is not just for geeks! > > Right on, but you could make sure not only geeks noticed the many poison > pills of OOXML. This discussion is an evident proof one of the poison > pills is getting at people. This discussion is not about supporting OOXML. - Jeff -- GNOME.conf.au 2008: Melbourne, Australia http://live.gnome.org/Melbourne2008 It's not just a song! It's a document of my life! ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: two questions for candidates
On Tue, Nov 27, 2007 at 02:49:34AM +1100, Jeff Waugh wrote: > > > > 1. Would you change anything in the GNOME Foundation statement about > > OOXML? > > I'd probably include a message about not fighting OOXML on political grounds > because they have no impact on the ISO standardisation process. To succeed, > we need to fight OOXML under the terms defined by ISO, which means nuking it > as hard was we possibly can on technical grounds. Microsoft isn't defending OOXML under the terms defined by ISO. They have successfully raised Somebody Else's Problem fields around all issues through means of the Technical Commission Control Force Field. It's impervious to how many megatons you can place on technical grounds if they bought more votes (either through reward or threat of punishment -- and on Portuguese TC-173 I *strongly* suspect one company was subject to threat of punishment: death like Netscape died). > Software Freedom is not just for geeks! Right on, but you could make sure not only geeks noticed the many poison pills of OOXML. This discussion is an evident proof one of the poison pills is getting at people. Best, Rui -- Umlaut Zebra �ber alles! Today is Boomtime, the 40th day of The Aftermath in the YOLD 3173 + No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown + Whatever you do will be insignificant, | but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi + So let's do it...? ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: two questions for candidates
> > > > 1. Would you change anything in the GNOME Foundation statement about > > OOXML? > > I'd probably include a message about not fighting OOXML on political > grounds because they have no impact on the ISO standardisation process. To > succeed, we need to fight OOXML under the terms defined by ISO, which > means nuking it as hard was we possibly can on technical grounds. Actually, a very important point, which I'm not just saying because this is a reply to a question from Richard... :-) What I *wouldn't* change in our statement is that the number 1 point in our position statement was Software Freedom, and that our final comment was to encourage people to contribute to Software Freedom. That's important because ultimately, whatever goes on with standards and their impact on our industry, *our* number 1 priority is Software Freedom, and making sure our users can access it, use it and enjoy it. - Jeff -- GNOME.conf.au 2008: Melbourne, Australia http://live.gnome.org/Melbourne2008 "Blessed are the cracked, for they let in the light." - Spike Milligan ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Call for logo -- GNOME Asia Summit
Where can I get more info about the specifications/requirement of the logo..? Thanks Tim http://dominor.com Emily chen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: A LOGO FOR GNOME ASIA SUMMIT All ideas and propositions are welcome. We suggest the following basic principles : Asia specific feature the logo related to GNOME or simple Send your logo and interpretation to : [EMAIL PROTECTED] . This logo will not only be used in GNOME Asia Summit - Beijing 2008, but also be used in the following GNOME Asia Summits. It is a great honor if your logo get accepted in GNOME Asia Summit. -Emily -- marketing-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list Be a partner of our 16 Real Estate Websites to boost your Search Engine Ranking. Exchange link with 16 real estate websites at once http://www.miami-realestate.net/en/submitlink.php?catid=55 Thanks Tracy<>___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Call for logo -- GNOME Asia Summit
A LOGO FOR GNOME ASIA SUMMIT All ideas and propositions are welcome. We suggest the following basic principles : Asia specific feature the logo related to GNOME or simple Send your logo and interpretation to : [EMAIL PROTECTED] . This logo will not only be used in GNOME Asia Summit - Beijing 2008, but also be used in the following GNOME Asia Summits. It is a great honor if your logo get accepted in GNOME Asia Summit. -Emily ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Questions to the candidates
On Nov 27, 2007 11:52 AM, John (J5) Palmieri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You are completely correct and I think the community can make the right > choices here that 6 elected people can not. I do however think the > foundation is well within it's power to make statements based on > community experts recommendations but for the most part should let > things be settled in the community. Amen! :) -- Og B. Maciel [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG Keys: D5CFC202 http://www.ogmaciel.com (en_US) http://blog.ogmaciel.com (pt_BR) ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Questions to the candidates
On Mon, 2007-11-26 at 16:31 +0100, Anne Østergaard wrote: > On Mon, 2007-11-26 at 09:48 -0500, John (J5) Palmieri wrote: > > On Thu, 2007-11-22 at 23:52 +0100, Anne Østergaard wrote: > > > Questions to the candidates: > > > > > > Will you apply for the position as new Executive Director for GNOME? > > > > No > > > > > > Will you apply for any paid position within GNOME while serving as board > > > member? > > > > No > > > > > Will you attend at least 90% of the board calls? > > > > Yes > > > > > Can you accept competing official ISO standards? > > > > Yes, as long as they are open and free of intellectual property > > concerns. It is then up to the developers what direction they wish to > > go in. The board should not set technical direction but rather reflect > > the will of the community while offering moral guidance as well as > > advice from expert advisers. > > If they are fully interoperable there might not be a legal problem, but > rather a political problem for the society about the costs. > > Well in that case we will also have an other situation to deal with, in > the case where the dominant standard has near monopoly status. Then it > becomes a question about monopoly versus free and open competition. > > We have all seen that even with a clear cut monopoly case in The > European Court of Justice recently, it is not easy to have the loosing > part change its conduct. Even if it eventually does so, it will take an > awful long time and it will probably not be to 100%. You are completely correct and I think the community can make the right choices here that 6 elected people can not. I do however think the foundation is well within it's power to make statements based on community experts recommendations but for the most part should let things be settled in the community. -- John (J5) Palmieri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: two questions for candidates
On Nov 27, 2007 7:20 AM, Gregory Leblanc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Nov 26, 2007 2:54 PM, Luis Villa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Nov 26, 2007 10:28 AM, Richard Stallman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [snip] > > > 2. How do you think the GNOME Foundation should support the Free > > > Software Movement in general? > > > [snip] > > > > More long-term, working with the online desktop folks, and hopefully > > with many other interested parties, we need to reframe what software > > freedom means in a network-centric world. It is now abundantly clear > > to most everyone that source code access is frequently insufficient to > > guarantee user autonomy; the question, then, is what additional (or > > perhaps different) requirements will help our users maintain their > > autonomy in the future. This is much bigger than GNOME, of course, but > > it seems likely that we will be at the cutting edge of it, and so > > we're going to have to deal with it whether we're the best forum for > > it or not :) > > I'm not quite clear on what you mean here, Luis. Can you suggest some > links that I might peruse that would describe what you mean by 'user > autonomy' and why source code access is insufficient to guarantee it? Keep an eye on my blog; essay on it going up in the next 24-48 hours. But you can get some flavor of it from previous posts: http://tieguy.org/blog/category/openservice/ and from http://live.gnome.org/FreeOpenServicesDefinition Nutshell: if a web service gives you source, but keeps your data and identity locked up, you have very little choice- very little autonomy- unlike the choice/autonomy you'd have if you were running locally-managed software and had the source. Luis ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: two questions for candidates
On Nov 26, 2007 2:54 PM, Luis Villa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Nov 26, 2007 10:28 AM, Richard Stallman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [snip] > > 2. How do you think the GNOME Foundation should support the Free > > Software Movement in general? > [snip] > > More long-term, working with the online desktop folks, and hopefully > with many other interested parties, we need to reframe what software > freedom means in a network-centric world. It is now abundantly clear > to most everyone that source code access is frequently insufficient to > guarantee user autonomy; the question, then, is what additional (or > perhaps different) requirements will help our users maintain their > autonomy in the future. This is much bigger than GNOME, of course, but > it seems likely that we will be at the cutting edge of it, and so > we're going to have to deal with it whether we're the best forum for > it or not :) I'm not quite clear on what you mean here, Luis. Can you suggest some links that I might peruse that would describe what you mean by 'user autonomy' and why source code access is insufficient to guarantee it? Thanks, Greg ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
