Subject: Re: Do We Need a New Evangelist
From: Ben Laurie <>
Date: Thu, 01 Apr 1999 21:10:22 +0100

Russell Nelson wrote:
> Ben Laurie writes:
>  > Russell Nelson wrote:
>  > > Well, that's why we have a trademark on Open Source(tm).  We intend to
>  > > limit use of it to those projects which we expect to be successful --
>  > > that is, those for which programmer freedom is an important and
>  > > necessary characteristic.  Maybe we don't talk about it all the
>  > > time--maybe we emphasize the benefits (as perceived by the people
>  > > we're marketing the idea to), but it's *got* to be there.
>  >
>  > Who is "we"?
>  Disclaimer: I speak for myself.
>  > What is your criterion for "success"?
> Being interesting enough to attract improvements, and having a license
> which permits those distribution of those improvements.  For example,
> mgr was a very nice windowing system, but it's license didn't permit
> commercial distribution.
>  > Why should I give a damn what "we" think will be "successful"?
> Can you explain why I should give a damn what you think?  If you can,
> that's probably your answer for why you should give a damn.  One
> simple answer would be "Well, there's only one Internet, and you keep
> running into the same people again and again, and it doesn't do to
> hack one of them off."

You are right. I should be more polite. My apologies.

My concern is that this board seems to be self-appointed, and has its
own criteria which are sufficiently vague that it isn't clear to me what
they are. I appear to be being asked to support them without them being
asked to be accountable to me.

This goes against the grain.

There are other issues, but I think I've made it pretty plain what those
are, so I won't labour the point (damn, there I go being crap at
marketing again :-).

Nothing personal.




"My grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those
who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the
first group; there was less competition there."
     - Indira Gandhi