[NMLUG] Re: Linux Advocacy FAQ is NOT Linux Advocacy Maxim (Robert Delahunt)

[neosad1st at charter.net (Robert)]

On Wednesday 01 September 2004 12:00 pm, nmlug-request@nmlug.org wrote:

> Because adherence to the Linux Advocacy FAQ seems to be "required" for
> those who wish to participate in the nmlug channel on Freenode, I gave
> it a read today.
>
> Here are my thoughts:
>
> While I agree, in principal, with almost everything put forward in this
> little doc, I do not wish to adhere to it.

Then I guess you don't have to "participate".  It's exactly that: principal.  
I refuse to have people bashing distributions and/or other software vendors 
or coders.  I refuse to have my channel end up like #debian on Freenode.  
However, I also refuse to have an argument over the NMLUG mailing list as 
well.

> My reasons are simple: 
>
> In my opinion, Linux is good.  Windows is not as good as Linux.

Depends.  My wife needs Adobe software, and Dreamweaver, for her college 
classes.  Tell me which one wins in this scenario.  However, she wishes she 
could use Linux, as I don't have many of the problems she has, or had, before 
Windows XP SP2.  Microsoft finally got their act in gear on this fix, so I 
bought her Windows XP, and I've had good results from it so far.  This is why 
I am not having this kind of garbage in my room: if something works, it 
works.  If it does not, it does not.  Linux was about freedom, not about 
being better than everyone else, and not about bashing everyone else.  
However, if you are a former Netscape employee laid off around the time of 
their lawsuit with Microsoft, I will allow you to rant and foam.

> I wish 
> to express my opinion, to whomever would bother to listen or who cares
> to listen, in whatever way I see fit.

Yes, and it's just as much your right to do so as it is mine to filter you 
out.

> I can bring myself to edit my 
> language, the use of vulgarities is not important to me - but I cannot
> bring myself to edit my opinions simply to avoid the chance of offending
> someone.

That wasn't the point of the Advocacy FAQ either.  It was to remind us, in 
general, that we are ambassadors of freedom to choose, not zealots who hide 
in an obscure OS and troll the internet.

> Truth be know, I am offended that I would be asked to edit my opinion at
> all, especially in an "Open Source" discussion channel.  Seems a bit odd!

And it seems a bit odd that they would include this Advocacy FAQ in nearly all 
major distributions, in the documentation section.  At least Slackware does.

> Call me a crazy American, but I dislike the Thought Police and I refuse
> to join up.

Then don't join.  I never forced you to.

> I am counting the days/minutes/whatever until I am thrown out of the IRC
> channel for using 'hyperbole' or 'exaggeration' or deciding that I want
> to say "I don't like Windows, and I think it stinks, no matter what the
> technology is like, because the company is a champion of mediocrity"  -
> which might violate section 6, the "Canons of Conduct".

I never said I'd kick you for voicing your opinion.  The Advocacy FAQ deals 
more with _how_ you say things rather than what you say.  I can say that 
Windows is lacking in proper user abilities or something, and that is fine, 
so long as I have proof and I'm not doing it just to be consumed with hatred 
for Microsoft.  I can say Linux is lacking in a nice feature Windows has, 
i.e. "lock out user after _# failed logins", but I bet there might be a 
feature out for Linux that I don't know about.  I never said you cannot say 
things contrary to any OS or software.  It's _how_ you say it, not what you 
say in this case.  But did you bother to ask me?  Nope.  I've never had 
anyone ask about that from my /topic, so even if you had a question, you 
didn't ask.  I now know that your point was to bash my channel, not to 
discuss what I meant, or even ask what I meant.

> Of course, there's nothing stopping anyone from setting up a new
> channel.  #nmlug_freespeech anyone?

Of course, it's your "right".

-- 
" ... and are endowed by their CREATOR
with certain unalienable rights ... "
-- Declaration of Independence