On Thu, 21 Jan 2016 14:41:40 +0000
Simon Hobson <linux@???> wrote:

> dev1fanboy <devuanfanboy@???> wrote:
>

> > So for having our own values we are a "hardcore cult", how dare we
> > voice our opinions or stand up for our values (like anyone else in
> > the free software community, btw). Better yet, let's go back to
> > debian because otherwise we're elitists.    

>
> That's not what I said - and if it reads that way then I failed
> articulate my opinion well (wouldn't be the first time).
>
> This is just the latest. There have been a few subjects that have
> come up where the undertone from some participants has been fairly
> solidly along the lines of "if it comes from X then it has to be bad"
> as though it's not possible for X to do anything other than totally
> bad, and do it for malicious reasons. When you get into that state of
> mind, then reasoned discussion is suppressed, and that doesn't
> promote a friendly atmosphere.

In the preceding paragraph, Simon has almost exactly described my
writings on this list, and on Debian-user earlier. It's my personal
belief that if it comes from Redhat, and perhaps other entities such
as FreeDesktop, it's almost certain to be both bad and malicious. I
can't prove this, because I've never been in a top level strategy
meeting for either Redhat or Freedesktop. I doubt anyone on this list
can prove my belief false, because they haven't been in every single
high level strategy meeting plus all back channel communications for
these entities.

What I *can* do is make a very plausible showing for Red Hat's motive,
means and opportunity to damage Linux for their own benefit. Motive,
means and opportunity don't prove guilt, but they go a long way to show
likelihood. And they go a long way in legitimizing the accusation, and
elevating the accuser from irrational conspiracy theorist to a
legitimate questioner of truth. Which to me inspires reasoned
discussion rather than suppressing it.

Let's briefly discuss "reasoned discussion". It's my belief that
"reasoned discussion" means different things in different venues. On
the Devuan list, reasoned discussion requires not only technology, but
also examination of motivation. The reason is simple: If we didn't
consider motivation, we'd always be aiming to be able to depoetterize
*today's* Linux, we'd always be chasing the tail of the latest
systemd architectural conquest, and we'd never output a usable product.

Once we consider motivation, we're better able to guess where Linux
will be in six months, and aim for that spot rather than today's spot.
We're much more likely to hit the target when we consider motivation.

SteveT

Steve Litt
January 2016 featured book: Twenty Eight Tales of Troubleshooting
http://www.troubleshooters.com/28