| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Russ Nelson proposes new license requirementsRuss Nelson proposes new license requirementsPosted Mar 2, 2005 21:36 UTC (Wed) by jwb (guest, #15467)In reply to: Russ Nelson proposes new license requirements by nigelm Parent article: Russ Nelson proposes new license requirements
That's happy. His racism and fringe economic theories were endangering the mission of the OSI. The OSI and open source efforts in general have enough problems without the appearance of being led by crackpots.
(Log in to post comments)
Russ Nelson proposes new license requirements Posted Mar 2, 2005 21:44 UTC (Wed) by LinuxLobbyist (guest, #6541) [Link] Never heard that before. Care to provide references rather than just making those assertions? I'm not contradicting you, I just like to check these kinds of accusations for myself.
Russ Nelson proposes new license requirements Posted Mar 2, 2005 21:48 UTC (Wed) by jwb (guest, #15467) [Link] His bizarre economics theories are plastered all over the internet. Try http://angry-economist.russnelson.com/ or http://blog.russnelson.com/economics . As for racism, see the row he incited with his recent thrilling economic essay "Blacks Are Lazy." He pulled it from his own site but Google has the cache.
Russ Nelson proposes new license requirements Posted Mar 2, 2005 22:46 UTC (Wed) by sdalley (subscriber, #18550) [Link] Hmm, interesting how people react. If you take the trouble to penetrate beneath the perhaps-not-so-apt use of words, you realise he's not anti-anyone, he's making a worthwhile comment about the value of free time, and that rightly understood, laziness can be a virtue. And in these days when there has never been such pressure to compete and perform, let us not say that value is unimportant. See, just one example, http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0767907698/ .
Russ Nelson proposes new license requirements Posted Mar 2, 2005 23:08 UTC (Wed) by LinuxLobbyist (guest, #6541) [Link] I guess he would have garnered more support for his statement had it been a generalized one about a group of murdered individuals being little Eichmanns. Sorry. This is getting way off topic. Maybe we should take it to the blogosphere. Any suggestions? (I don't have one myself.) Only half kidding, here.
Russ Nelson proposes new license requirements Posted Mar 2, 2005 23:14 UTC (Wed) by allesfresser (guest, #216) [Link] Or, on an alternate line of thought: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1580085520 My wife bought this book recently and it has a refreshingly different perspective--I thought maybe you all might appreciate it... :-)
Russ Nelson proposes new license requirements Posted Mar 2, 2005 23:44 UTC (Wed) by BrucePerens (subscriber, #2510) [Link] Yes, he was making an economic point, not a racist one. But he demonstrated a lack of empathy in wording it the way he did. Someone else might have had the communication skill to make that point without the slightest bit of offensiveness.Bruce
Russ Nelson proposes new license requirements Posted Mar 3, 2005 3:52 UTC (Thu) by bk (guest, #25617) [Link] Maybe he was trying to make an economic point but he inadvertently revealed his rather racist and, frankly, nonsensical viewpoint. For instance, the piece is centered around the assertion (never justified with evidence) that individuals that are paid less will not work as hard.
This is utter nonsense.
Statistically, the vast majority of people do not work because it is enjoyable. People work so they have the means to survive. Therefore the cost of subsistence will always dictate the minimum work required of an individual. If you pay a person less, they will have to work more. If you pay a person more, they will have the luxury of less work ("free time"), unnecessary luxury goods or both.
It should be obvious, therefore, that the most effective way to extract the most work out of an individual is to pay them such that for them to earn enough to survive they must work to the maximimum of their physical ability. A subsistence wage.
Russ Nelson doesn't know what he's writing about.
Idleness is good Posted Mar 2, 2005 23:46 UTC (Wed) by Max.Hyre (subscriber, #1054) [Link] [R]ightly understood, laziness can be a virtue. Some years ago (never mind exactly how many) my high-school English teacher accused me of not paying sufficient attention in class, or some such. So, I went out and bought a copy of Bertrand Russell's In Praise of Idleness and Other Essays, and conspicuously read it in class. She never said anything about it.
Russ Nelson proposes new license requirements Posted Mar 2, 2005 23:37 UTC (Wed) by pyellman (guest, #4997) [Link] I followed your link and gave what I found a good reading over. Although his opinions and perspectives on economics do not cleave strictly to the line of the one or perhaps two major strains of (barely differentiated) economic "schools of thought" in this country, I found little or nothing that could be characterized as bizzare. Similar thoughts, and different ones, are absolutely commonplace in this country. At a minimum, Mr. Nelson does a fair job of structuring his opinions in a sensible, readable manner, which usually is an indicator of a non-bizzare person.
As for your claim of racism, my reading leads me to believe that were it not for the provocative title Mr. Nelson chose for his brief essay, there would be little that was remarkable in it. It is a common rhetorical practice to lead a fairly mundane essay -- which is this case boils down to "People who see little benefit from working may have less motivation to do so" with a provocative title such as what Mr. Nelson chose, though I can't for the life of me figure out why -- it always seems to backfire.
One thing I will note, and in that agree that Mr. Nelson has made a mistake, is that when in a position which brings with it public scrunity, you are not, at least in this country, permitted to publicly declare any opinions, on a large number of subjects, which might diverge even trivially from the dominant paradigms. Personally, I don't think that's right or good for the country or society, but I recognize that that's the way it is and that therefore Mr. Nelson is not the right person for the position, as any attention given to his other opinions probably distracts from his ability to fill the role of OSI president.
For that, however, I mainly blame people like you. Frankly, I found your behavior and name calling to be far more offensive than anything I saw written by Mr. Nelson. Please do me the favor of identifying yourself, so that I may attach a name and possibly a face to this kind of reflexive namecalling and smallmindness.
Peter Yellman
Russ Nelson proposes new license requirements Posted Mar 2, 2005 23:47 UTC (Wed) by BrucePerens (subscriber, #2510) [Link] So, here's where I have a bone to pick with his presentation. I personally represent two causes: Open Source, and Amateur Radio. I have very strong feelings about a number of issues such as church and state, abortion, and gun control. You aren't going to find out what those feelings are. I figure that if you don't like the way I feel about gun control or abortion, you aren't going to listen to what I have to say about Open Source.Bruce
Russ Nelson proposes new license requirements Posted Mar 3, 2005 1:04 UTC (Thu) by rickmoen (subscriber, #6943) [Link] Bruce, your point is well taken. But there's a further one, which should be noted: There are people out there with no discernable ethics, who will use anything they can find out about you personally, without concern for context or sense of proportion, to attempt to destroy your effectiveness in your trade or profession -- or in vital non-profit work that you do on the side. The open-source community, in particular, is bogged down by significant numbers of these low-life. The recent campaign we saw carried out in public (Slashdot, OSI license-discuss) against Russ Nelson over his 2001 snip of a personal-blog essay (to which he reacted quite graciously by replacing it with a note saying it was poorly worded and had been withdrawn) seems to have been 100% anonymous, scurrilous, and malicious. I wasted no time in advising the perpetrators that I thought they were lowlife scum attacking someone doing valuable work, and I frankly wish you would, too. (I did think it was a rather poorly written and silly personal essay, but that was quite beside the point.) Best Regards
Russ Nelson proposes new license requirements Posted Mar 3, 2005 1:30 UTC (Thu) by LinuxLobbyist (guest, #6541) [Link] The irony of this whole fiasco is that after reading a thread Russ started on slashdot in early February, I find his views on the FSF and RMS more offensive than his badly worded essay. For that reason, I don't think he should be the president of OSI. One can have disagreements with the FSF and RMS, but I don't think it's wise for the leader of OSI to be publically disparaging the hand the feeds it (e.g.: with much of the code we all use). But I can still can't help but believe that you are spot on here, Rick, that this whole "Blacks are Lazy" fiasco has been nothing but a smear campaign (that, unfortunately, Russ invited with the inflamatory title and poorly thought out essay). Whatever you may think of Dave Horowitz, this sounds eerily similar to his experience with Al Franken calling him a racist (see here for Mr. Horowitz' response). It was an assertion that he backed up with exactly zero evidence. And humorous, to boot, when you take just a cursory look at David Horowitz' civil rights history. And just so I'm not accused by anyone of hiding behind the safety of anonymity, I will sign with my real name. Not that I've kept it secret, as I use this handle on more than couple of sites. -Paul Iadonisi Senior System Administrator Red Hat Certified Engineer / Local Linux Lobbyist Ever see a penguin fly? -- Try Linux. GPL all the way: Sell services, don't lease secrets
Russ Nelson proposes new license requirements Posted Mar 4, 2005 16:32 UTC (Fri) by rjw (guest, #10415) [Link] Sorry, but I just had a very very cursory google about David Horowitz, and he really doesn't seem to be innocent of the charge. Most informative:http://mediamatters.org/items/200412020001
He seems to be very capable of inexplicably branding people racist himself.
I don't think it is a very good example to bring up.... at least for someone you want to defend.
Russ Nelson proposes new license requirements Posted Mar 5, 2005 1:10 UTC (Sat) by LinuxLobbyist (guest, #6541) [Link] I don't think it is a very good example to bring up.... at least for someone you want to defend. Hoping this is the last of this thread, but I just wanted to dispel this nonsense. I checked the link you posted. Even though Media Matters is not a place I would generally trust for good, scholarly analysis, I gave them the benefit of the doubt. I'm sorry to say that, in particular (but certaintly not limit to), their 'catalogued' instances of David Horowitz' racism was done in almost the precise same manner as the anonymous smearers in this thread. Unfortunately for MM, they actually provided links, probably in the hopes that most people wouldn't actually go and read what was on the other end of them. I did, and their arguments don't hold up. Sorry, but it most certainly was a good example to bring up. By the way, I didn't catch your name. -Paul Iadonisi Senior System Administrator Red Hat Certified Engineer / Local Linux Lobbyist Ever see a penguin fly? -- Try Linux. GPL all the way: Sell services, don't lease secrets
Russ Nelson proposes new license requirements Posted Mar 3, 2005 1:49 UTC (Thu) by jwb (guest, #15467) [Link] Listen Rick, if you write an essay that says "Blacks Are Lazy" (as does Russ, and the "blacks are lazy" phrase remains even after his 10th edition) you are a racist. There is quite a difference between saying someone is lazy, which is a criticism of that person's character, and saying that someone is underincentivized, which is a criticism of the market. The market criticism is barely perceptible through the racist crap. The only explanations are 1) he really is a racist, or 2) he cannot appreciate the nuance between lazy and underincentivized. In either case, I'd rather not have him in a political position leading a group which purports to stand for open source software.
If people don't want their words to have consequences, they ought to not publish them. There's a lot of crap in usenet archives that I'd rather forget, but it's my own fault and I don't expect other people to self-censor just to protect my delicate ego.
Russ Nelson proposes new license requirements Posted Mar 3, 2005 2:09 UTC (Thu) by LinuxLobbyist (guest, #6541) [Link] So do you think Mason Weaver's book titled "It's Okay To Leave the Plantation" is racist, too? Seriously, now, judging things by the title? Whatever happened to the slashdot admonishment, "RTFA"? Note that I'm not implying you haven't read the essay in question, or even that the essay is good, but calling someone racist for a poor choice of words isn't any better than the essay itself. And you've pretty much admitted that you would judge an article written by Rick Moen titled "Blacks are Lazy" by it's poorly chosen title. Signed, an angry white male (like that should make any difference, unless you are a racist, of course). -Paul Iadonisi Senior System Administrator Red Hat Certified Engineer / Local Linux Lobbyist Ever see a penguin fly? -- Try Linux. GPL all the way: Sell services, don't lease secrets
Russ Nelson proposes new license requirements Posted Mar 3, 2005 3:25 UTC (Thu) by rickmoen (subscriber, #6943) [Link] "jwb" wrote:Listen Rick, if you write an essay that says "Blacks Are Lazy"... ...then, you are significant risk of spurious personal attack from anonymous trolls who either can't be bothered to read it, or do and are prepared to throw common sense, not to mention any residual personal ethics, to the wind. Right, got that. If people don't want their words to have consequences, they ought to not publish them. Speaking of consequences, who were you, again? Oh, right, a particularly disgusting anonymous critic of people who actually do perform useful work for our community. Well, my community, anyway. Rick Moen
Russ Nelson proposes new license requirements Posted Mar 3, 2005 3:41 UTC (Thu) by jwb (guest, #15467) [Link] You seem hell-bent on casting a happy light on the essay, so I'll be the first in this flamefest to actually introduce the primary material.Black people are lazy in that they work less hard than whites. Not only that, but they are rational to be lazy! After black slaves were freed, they worked less. The value of their leisure time (highly valued after a lifetime of slavery) exceeded the pay from their work. Also, ongoing American racism has caused blacks to be paid less than whites. He goes on in the next few sentences to dig himself further into his hole in the course of making a bizarre and completely unfounded argument about races and economics. But the point still stands that he's using "lazy" - a character insult - to substitute for his real point about economics. As I said above, he's either a racist or the worst writer in the English language today. Michael Tiemann is going to be a *far* better choice. Besides his numerous contributions to the code base he also has a proven ability to interact with individuals, organizations, and corporations without wedging his boot in his mouth.
Russ Nelson proposes new license requirements Posted Mar 3, 2005 3:49 UTC (Thu) by LinuxLobbyist (guest, #6541) [Link] I'm sorry, jwb, what did you say your real name was? /me slaps foreheadDoh! Silly me. -Paul Iadonisi Senior System Administrator Red Hat Certified Engineer / Local Linux Lobbyist Ever see a penguin fly? -- Try Linux. GPL all the way: Sell services, don't lease secrets
Russ Nelson proposes new license requirements Posted Mar 3, 2005 3:50 UTC (Thu) by rickmoen (subscriber, #6943) [Link] "jwb" wrote:You seem hell-bent on casting a happy light on the essay... This statement is, of course, in glorious defiance of the plain facts of my post. Either that, or you have a selective inability to comprehend the words "rather poorly written and silly personal essay". Pick one, please: incompetence or malice. But, of course, you don't have to worry about issues of personal responsibility: You're yet another anonymous flamer. Or would you rather sign your name to these name- calling exercises and personal-attack drivel you've been gracing us with, which misdeed you're now compounding with flagrantly selective quotation? Want to dig yourself in deeper, "jwb"? Rick Moen
Russ Nelson proposes new license requirements Posted Mar 3, 2005 4:04 UTC (Thu) by bk (guest, #25617) [Link] Since when is "racist" equivalent to "silly"? Either you are trivializing racism or you are defending the essay as not being racist, perhaps because you share those views.
"Black people are lazy in that they work less hard than whites."
Defend the non-racist nature of that statement, please.
Thanks,
Russ Nelson proposes new license requirements Posted Mar 3, 2005 4:17 UTC (Thu) by LinuxLobbyist (guest, #6541) [Link] "Black people are lazy in that they work less hard than whites." Defend the non-racist nature of that statement, please. If he did that, he would be playing into your own game of flagrant selective quoting. Funny, I think I heard your demand before. Oh, yes! It went like this: "do you still be your wife", or something like that. Click on the link I gave earlier to take you to Dave Horowitz' response to Al Franken's accusation of racism and read at least the first paragraph or two for a little education. Pay attention to words like "toxic" and "witch-hunt". Unless, of course, you don't wish to be exposed. But of course, you don't have to worry about that publically, now, do you mister "bk" aka Anonymous Coward #2? -Paul Iadonisi Senior System Administrator Red Hat Certified Engineer / Local Linux Lobbyist Ever see a penguin fly? -- Try Linux. GPL all the way: Sell services, don't lease secrets
Russ Nelson proposes new license requirements Posted Mar 3, 2005 4:21 UTC (Thu) by rickmoen (subscriber, #6943) [Link] "bk" wrote:Oh, look. It's another anonymous flamer! (Of course, it might actually be the same one. Once cannot tell.) Since when is "racist" equivalent to "silly"? The answer to your impertinent question is, of course, "Mu": The question cannot be answered as posed on account of the whack-assed assumption on which it rests. The rest of us, who are possessed of both a capacity for common sense and the inclination to stick to fair commentary that we're willing to actually stand behind, read the personal-blog essay (if we gave a damn) and thought "Well, I think I see what he's trying to say, but it's badly expressed and not worth spilling virtual ink over anyway." But you're of course burdened with neither quality, and so can stop with blatant name- calling slurs and question-begging questions that insult our intelligence. And who were you again, by the way? If you think I'm going to "defend" anything at all, ever, to the likes of you, you're severely deluded, sir/ madam/critter. Whether you're one anonymous flamer or several, I'd rather just drop the lot of you into the same oubliette. And good riddance. Rick Moen
Russ Nelson proposes new license requirements Posted Mar 3, 2005 5:46 UTC (Thu) by RussNelson (guest, #27730) [Link] "Black people are lazy in that they work less hard than whites." Defend the non-racist nature of that statement, please.Out of context, it is indefensible. In context, I have abandoned it. What is your point? That you can quote people out of context? Congratulations, you know how to use a text editor! It's obvious that you, yourself, are a racist. Why else you would be attacking me so strongly?
Russ Nelson proposes new license requirements Posted Mar 3, 2005 5:48 UTC (Thu) by RussNelson (guest, #27730) [Link] he's either a racist or the worst writer in the English language today.Okay, we've now established that I'm not a racist. Do you care to stop calling me one?
Russ Nelson proposes new license requirements Posted Mar 3, 2005 6:20 UTC (Thu) by RussNelson (guest, #27730) [Link] the "blacks are lazy" phrase remains even after his 10th edition) you are a racist."Now playing #1 on the Ignoramus chart is jwb!" Dude, it's simply not possible to remove the "blacks are lazy" (oh no, I said it again) phrase without deleting the post entirely. My preference is to retract it completely in every way, shape, or form. I simply didn't anticipate that ANYBODY could be SO STUPID as to think that I ACTUALLY believe that BLACKS ARE LAZY (there, I said it again). Anybody with two brain cells to scrape together who reads the original posting can see that my point was that any perception that BLACKS ARE LAZY (oh, no, I said it again!) is caused exactly and precisely by racism, and that the original genesis of the idea was very likely the fact that freed slaves chose to work less hard than when THEY WERE BEATEN INTO WORKING HARD. There, have I given you enough material to quote me out of context? I may as well, since you and others have already done it.
Russ Nelson proposes new license requirements Posted Mar 3, 2005 2:37 UTC (Thu) by BrucePerens (subscriber, #2510) [Link] Rick,As far as I can tell the piece was penned on February 7, 2005. The "Jan 1 2001" appears to be spurious. The date is significant because it appears that Russ knew that he was or would be be OSI president when he posted the piece. I wasn't witness to the defamation campaign as I was at LinuxWorld when this happened. But a Fortune 500 CEO did mention the poorly-worded article to me, with some concern. My grandfather was chief judge of the Bronx, in New York. He would never gamble, because to be seen gambling might create the appearance of impropriety. Unfortunately, we Open Source and Free Software spokespeople do have to be concerned about how we are seen. This hasn't been easy for me either, so I sympathize with Russ. Bruce
Russ Nelson proposes new license requirements Posted Mar 3, 2005 3:26 UTC (Thu) by LinuxLobbyist (guest, #6541) [Link] As far as I can tell the piece was penned on February 7, 2005. The "Jan 1 2001" appears to be spurious. The date is significant because it appears that Russ knew that he was or would be be OSI president when he posted the piece. Um, what makes you say it's spurious? Have you asked him? Pardon me for saying so, Bruce, but if you haven't asked him, then you're claim isn't based on fact, but speculation. It could very well be the original date with February 7, 2005 being the date it was updated/pulled. I wasn't witness to the defamation campaign as I was at LinuxWorld when this happened. But a Fortune 500 CEO did mention the poorly-worded article to me, with some concern. That some anonymous Fortune 500 CEO mentioned ... with some concern doesn't mean a thing. Did you suggest to this CEO that he contact Russ (sheesh, he even has his cell phone number on his site)? If this CEO didn't want to do that, then he's no better than the people Rick is describing: trusting in rumour and innuendo instead of facts. Open Source and Free Software spokespeople do have to be concerned about how we are seen. With all due respect, Bruce, poppycock. That's true only with respect to the subject at hand: FOSS. It's why I never paid much attention to what seemed like ESR's Christian-bashing to me. I don't know or even want to know whether or not he actually did bash Christians (though there is definitely at least one allusion to that in the Anti-Idiotarian Manifesto, even though it's not all that bad). What concerned me is what he said about Free and/or Open Source software and I was decidedly annoyed by some of those comments at least when it came to the FSF and RMS, and, you might be glad to hear, Bruce Perens ;-). If there are many CEOs that are concerned about some comments allegedly made by the president of OSI that have little or nothing to do with their positions and made in a entirely different and personal forum: his blog and yet they won't check the comments out for themselves and engage in some honest communication with the supposed offender, then we have a lot more to worry about than the promotion of FOSS in business. -Paul Iadonisi Senior System Administrator Red Hat Certified Engineer / Local Linux Lobbyist Ever see a penguin fly? -- Try Linux. GPL all the way: Sell services, don't lease secrets
Russ Nelson proposes new license requirements Posted Mar 3, 2005 5:04 UTC (Thu) by BrucePerens (subscriber, #2510) [Link] Have you asked him?When the piece first came to my attention, it bore the proper date. I discussed the piece with Russ at LinuxWorld. He did not present it as an old piece that people had to dig up to defame him. And I don't think you seriously believe that the piece was written at 00:00 on 1 January 2001. Look at the time on the bottom of the page. It's obviously an epochal date for the software being used. Did you suggest to this CEO that he contact Russ The response of that CEO and the response I heard indirectly from a VP of a big company was that because of the incident, they didn't want to deal with him any longer. It's why I never paid much attention to what seemed like ESR's Christian-bashing to me. Well, I'm glad it doesn't bother you, but you're already converted to our cause. I was very uncomfortable with Eric's issue-mixing and did feel that it caused us harm. yet they won't check the comments out for themselves and engage in some honest communication with the supposed offender I think they did check the comments out for themselves. I believe their response was not to the nature of Russ' comment but to the fact that someone who would make such a comment in a public venue was a major political liability to Open Source. In the companies where those folks worked, what Russ wrote would have gotten a person fired, and their response to us was "get rid of that guy". Of course I wasn't in a position to do anything about that except to attempt to impress upon Russ the importance of the situation. Bruce
Russ Nelson proposes new license requirements Posted Mar 3, 2005 5:22 UTC (Thu) by LinuxLobbyist (guest, #6541) [Link] Points taken. You've certainly expended more effort in this debate than some people who still choose to cowardly remain nameless. Thanks for your reasoned insight. And I don't think you seriously believe that the piece was written at 00:00 on 1 January 2001. Heh. I didn't think much of the date, but I didn't notice the time. The response of that CEO and the response I heard indirectly from a VP of a big company was that because of the incident, they didn't want to deal with him any longer. Well, that's their own prerogatives, but it still begs the question of whether or not they were depending on what other people were saying about what Russ was saying. I believe their response was not to the nature of Russ' comment but to the fact that someone who would make such a comment in a public venue was a major political liability to Open Source. I still think it was overblown given the personal nature of the blog, public or not. In the companies where those folks worked, what Russ wrote would have gotten a person fired, and their response to us was "get rid of that guy". Yes, it might have gotten him fired, which might, in turn, have gotten the company sued, as we are learning from some fired-for-blogging cases like the "Queen of Sky" case among others. Corporate executives need to grow thicker skins. -Paul Iadonisi Senior System Administrator Red Hat Certified Engineer / Local Linux Lobbyist Ever see a penguin fly? -- Try Linux. GPL all the way: Sell services, don't lease secrets
Russ Nelson proposes new license requirements Posted Mar 3, 2005 5:38 UTC (Thu) by LinuxLobbyist (guest, #6541) [Link] Slight correction. The Queen of Sky issue isn't being litigated, as best as I could find out, though she did file a complaint with the EEOC and was appealing to the airline to try and get her job back. -Paul Iadonisi Senior System Administrator Red Hat Certified Engineer / Local Linux Lobbyist Ever see a penguin fly? -- Try Linux. GPL all the way: Sell services, don't lease secrets
Russ Nelson proposes new license requirements Posted Mar 3, 2005 3:43 UTC (Thu) by rickmoen (subscriber, #6943) [Link] Bruce, interesting and pertinent commentary, as always. Thank you for providing useful additional detail.(Personally, I have a difficult time taking seriously someone carping over the contents of a prominent volunteer-community member's personal blog -- strategically deceptive date stamp or not. I mean, it's a personal blog, for heaven's sake, the ASCII equivalent of shower-stall karaoke. A Fortune 500 executive might be clueless about the relevant perspective, but that doesn't mean the rest of us should be. And such a volunteer -- for good or for bad -- is logically hardly subject to anything like a judge's standards of personal trustworthiness and gravitas.) Best Regards,
Russ Nelson proposes new license requirements Posted Mar 3, 2005 5:12 UTC (Thu) by BrucePerens (subscriber, #2510) [Link] I mean, it's a personal blog, for heaven's sake, the ASCII equivalent of shower-stall karaoke.Rick, Shower-stall karoke is not broadcast around the world and text-searchable. Maybe it doesn't happen to you as often, but I have had semi-private communications appear on the front page of Slashdot 15 minutes after I made them, and then make their way to CNET within hours. When you reach a particular level of notoriety this becomes a very real problem. And because of that I've learned to conduct myself differently. Bruce
Russ Nelson proposes new license requirements Posted Mar 3, 2005 6:07 UTC (Thu) by RussNelson (guest, #27730) [Link] When you reach a particular level of notoriety this becomes a very real problem. And because of that I've learned to conduct myself differently.I was just starting to figure that out when the loony-bins descended on me. Oh well, rule #1 is: never say anything which sounds bad taken out of context. This furor will pass, all will be forgotten, and I'll have another chance at all the fame(!) and fortune(?) the presidency of OSI gets you.
Russ Nelson proposes new license requirements Posted Mar 3, 2005 6:45 UTC (Thu) by LinuxLobbyist (guest, #6541) [Link] rule #1 is: never say anything which sounds bad taken out of context Of course -- and maybe your implying this -- that's quite an impossibility. The witch-hunters, as we've seen from those who don't seem to want to sign their real names in this thread, will twist and contort what you say to smear you. If you write "I never said, 'I hate green people'" the anonymous witch-hunters will quote the 'I hate green people' portion. IMNSHO, if you are confident in you're views, the best approach is unapologetic transparency. Let what you say speak for itself and those with not-so-twisted senses of decency will seek out what you've written including any subsequent commentary you make to clarify what you wrote instead of picking out what they perceive as offensive, even though they know darn well they are smearing someone to a) silence opposing viewpoints or b) impose their politically correct language on the unsuspecting. Though Bruce makes some good points, I beg to differ that this would have made much of a difference in the grand scheme of things. If ESR's non-FOSS rants really harmed 'us', I'm straining to see just how. It's his FOSS views that concerned me, and we'll never really know where we'd be if it wasn't for ESR, or for the OSI, for that matter. CatB was his most significant contribution. The rest...well, eh, who can say. Personally, Russ, I didn't like a lot of what I saw you post on slashdot about the FSF and I respectfully (though vehemently) disagree. And that is why I think you didn't belong at head of the OSI. Using freshmeat.net, take a look at the percentages of projects using the GPL or the LGPL and note where they rank. That says a lot about what people think of the licenses that the FSF has contributed and should command our respect. Given the numbers for the MPL and the QPL, I'd say they were near complete failures in terms of acceptance. I suspect the CDDL is going to fare even worse. Your final act as president (adding three more conditions for new licenses) was probably the best thing anyone could have done. But I must give credit where credit is due. It takes guts to come here and participate in a discussion where some disingenious folks are calling you a racist. Know that you are in good company. If you like David Horowitz, that is. But there are many more victims of this witch-hunt. You're right. Being called a racist hurts. It's toxic. Especially if you know in your heart that you are quite the opposite. -Paul Iadonisi Senior System Administrator Red Hat Certified Engineer / Local Linux Lobbyist Ever see a penguin fly? -- Try Linux. GPL all the way: Sell services, don't lease secrets
Russ Nelson proposes new license requirements Posted Mar 3, 2005 6:36 UTC (Thu) by rickmoen (subscriber, #6943) [Link] Bruce wrote:Shower-stall karoke is not broadcast around the world and text-searchable. Yes, I admittedly exaggerated a bit -- but not by much: The key phrase remains "personal blog". Digging into someone's personal blog for out-of-context snippets to decry in public as if they were part of his institutional affairs is obviously, paradigmatically scurrilous and generally the province of people so devoid of scruple as to be not worth scraping off the bottom of my shoe -- e.g., the, anonymous er. bulvons[1] we've been hearing from in this thread. Even your Fortune 500 executive would probably either figure that out or having his/her handler point it out to him. [1] As we say in Norwegian. ;-) (Er, Leo Rosten has a definition, if you need it.) Best Regards,
Russ Nelson proposes new license requirements Posted Mar 3, 2005 13:54 UTC (Thu) by icin (guest, #28193) [Link] I figure that if you don't like the way I feel about gun control or abortion, you aren't going to listen to what I have to say about Open SourceThat statement makes no logical sense. It could be rephrased as: I figure that if you don't like the way I feel about Open Source or abortion, you aren't going to listen to what I have to say about gun control. If you've got an opinion - voice it for goodness-sake. Don't let perceived controversy/pressure put you off. If everyone thought like that women wouldn't have the vote, civil rights wouldn't have happened etc etc. Sheesh.
Russ Nelson proposes new license requirements Posted Mar 3, 2005 18:59 UTC (Thu) by rickmoen (subscriber, #6943) [Link] Peter Yellman wrote:It is a common rhetorical practice to lead a fairly mundane essay [...] with a provocative title such as what Mr. Nelson chose, though I can't for the life of me figure out why -- it always seems to backfire. It fails (particularly in the open source community) because of a small number of moral defective nonentities getting their thrills by misusing those sound bites, where possible, to bash those well-known for accomplishment. It gives them a momentary feeling of personal significance, by association. They do it because they can, because they lack personal scruple, and because (being carefully anonymous) they don't have to fear being held accountable for it. There's an old-fashioned word for that, that I don't think I've had cause to haul out in forty years: cowardice. And, Bruce? You're a good guy, I respect your views, and appreciate your comments, but you really ought to disavow the scummy company you've been in, in this thread. (I refer, here, to the several anonymous smear-artists.) You'll feel much cleaner, trust me. Best Regards,
Russ Nelson proposes new license requirements Posted Mar 3, 2005 6:00 UTC (Thu) by RussNelson (guest, #27730) [Link] His bizarre economics theoriesSigh. I'm SO EASY to troll. Okay, "jwb" (if in fact you really ARE jwb, or if you are instead some imposter who merely calls himself jwb so that we will confuse you with the REAL jwb, whoever *he* is), here's the deal: my economic theories are called "Austrian" economics. The fact that you can't name them as such says that you wouldn't recognize a bizarre economic theory if it came up and introduced itself to you as "Hi, I'm Mr. Bizarre Economic Theory. How are you today?"
Russ Nelson proposes new license requirements Posted Mar 3, 2005 6:45 UTC (Thu) by jwb (guest, #15467) [Link] It seems like every time you get in front of a keyboard you divulge ample evidence of why you'reunsuited to being the president of OSI. You needn't continue if this is your highest level of discourse.
Russ Nelson proposes new license requirements Posted Mar 3, 2005 7:16 UTC (Thu) by rickmoen (subscriber, #6943) [Link] "jwb" wrote:It seems like every time you get in front of a keyboard you divulge ample evidence of why you're unsuited to being the president of OSI. And who were you again, Sir Scurrilous? Russ actually did real, excellent work as OSI head, appreciated highly by me and many others -- as he continues to do in other capacities. You, by contrast, seem to be a pimple on the derriere of open source, lacking even the elementary decency to sign your name to your ethically degenerate backstabs. I wouldn't actually injure you and your ilk if I were able to hunt you down, but the notion of strapping you into chairs and singing a few thousand rousing choruses of the F__ You Song[1] has strong appeal. [1] As featured, passim, in "Lost in Transition" by Wil McCarthy, a rousingly fun SF book. I'm appending that comment so that my time is not entirely wasted through being focussed on you and your cohort. Rick Moen
Russ Nelson proposes new license requirements Posted Mar 3, 2005 15:10 UTC (Thu) by RussNelson (guest, #27730) [Link] You needn't continue if this is your highest level of discourse.AHA! So I have defeated you intellectually! I'm glad that you admit it.
Russ Nelson proposes new license requirements Posted Mar 3, 2005 0:31 UTC (Thu) by rickmoen (subscriber, #6943) [Link] "jwb" wrote:"racism" ... "endangering the mission of the OSI" ... "crackpots" ... Speaking of crackpots, "jwb", as long as you're taking gratuitous personal slams at public figures -- one who are probably precluded by the libel laws from striking back -- would you mind at least signing a real name, preferably your own, to your rhetoric? Going after the professional suitability of public figures, while speaking as a critic from behind cover of anonymity, where the object of criticism is (one's facile and inaccurate commentary on) the person's personal blog, strikes me as extremely sleazy. It's the very, very worst tradition of the gutter portion of the open source movement -- your portion, it would seem. I'm sick of it, and see no reason to tolerate it further. Sincerely,
Rick Moen wants to make and eat blog cake was: Russ Nelson proposes new license requirements Posted Mar 3, 2005 4:57 UTC (Thu) by akumria (subscriber, #7773) [Link] Going after the professional suitability of public figures, while speaking as a critic from behind cover of anonymityThat would be the cover of anonymity a paying subscriber to LWN nets you. person's personal blog What? Like a diary? That people hide. Or what? Like a diary that people want to share. You can't have it both ways. I have a 'blog' (I call it a diary, I'm not so trendy). But I don't want to share it. If you want to share your diary, then face the consequences. Those consequences can include people forming an opinion about you without ever having met you. Labelling you as various things just on the basis of what you have written, etc.
And yet another anonymous flamer Posted Mar 3, 2005 5:34 UTC (Thu) by rickmoen (subscriber, #6943) [Link] "akumria" wrote:That would be the cover of anonymity a paying subscriber to LWN nets you. Excellent! Which scurillous backstabber are you? Are you the third, or is this all one guy? What? Like a diary? If I have to tell you what a personal blog is like, you're either past my help or blissfully unacquainted with the ridiculous things. If the former, oh well. If the latter, I envy you. You can't have it both ways. Sorry, you can take your phony, artificial contradiction and file it with your nonexistent personal credentials. The irony of you talking about people standing behind what they write is rather astonishing, I must say. And, come to think of it, though I've never met Russ and so don't know him from personal experience -- but was just reminded of this by my friend Rob Walker -- the notion of accusing this extremely well-known, devout Quaker of racism is about the most laughable thing I've heard all day long. Rick Moen
|
|
||||||||||||