Bruce Badger wrote:
> > ...snip ....
> > In the circles I frequent, the ACS is seen as
> > a bit of a joke - an MS shill, and not overly interested in true state of the
> > art. I think IEEE's Computer Society isn't bad, but it isn't local.
>
> A tad harsh on the ACS, I think.
I disagree. In 20 years of IT, the question of ACS membership has only
been raised once and it is, in my experience, generally not held in high
esteem.
The ACS decided to be an elitist oganisation right from the start and as
a consequence it is largely irrelevant.
When the formalisation of SLUG was considered, being under ACS was
considered for a mirthful microsecond.
>
> In New South Wales the ACS have an open source SIG,
As does AUUG, which was seriously considered for the formalisation of
SLUG, but it was felt that an US & Them situation would exist from
membership of AUUG costing $100pa.
Both were also felt to be Johnny-come-lately organisations to the
question of open source and that the real reason for them taking on
board open-source was to retain members, rather than promote open
source.
I've always felt that SLUG was the best for open source, because it was
not elitest and restrictive in whom it would accept.
--
Terry Collins {:-)}}} email: terryc at woa.com.au www:
http://www.woa.com.au
Wombat Outdoor Adventures <Bicycles, Computers, GIS, Printing,
Publishing>
"People without trees are like fish without clean water"
--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/
More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
