[GNUz] Re: Naming Groups was: UTP Cables from Solid Core

[Rik Tindall]

Cheers Jim, for picking up the dialog..

Jim Cheetham wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 11, 2007 at 12:36:04PM +1300, Rik Tindall wrote:
>> GNU/Linux User Group of Waitaha/Canterbury?
> 
> Personally, any group called "Linux" is limiting themselves to some
> arbitrary technical definition. If it's the *activity* of a group
> that's your main interest, why not name them in that manner?

Mainly because it is dishonest, so perpetuating that has to be 
challenged. Because it is teaching bad habits, and intentionally so.

A few years experience have taught me that "Linux" is actually a 
stalking horse for exploiting and denying GNU. - Have run out of 
patience with the false labelling, that's all.

> After all, a "PC User Group" would exclude anyone running Linux on
> non-IBM-PC-Compatible machines; a "Windows User Group" excludes ...
> well, everything; the "Macintosh Users group" tends to exclude Linux,
> even though there's a huge overlap between OS X and other Unix (and a
> very high proportion of Free Software/Open Source developers use Macs as
> their main computers) ...

Yes, the unspoken issue is that a Canty Unix UG is the strongest impetus 
within 'the movement' we have. But forming that would require sufficient 
courage of conviction to break from GNU(/Linux) in title, which is the 
point that seems to need hammering. Resolution of 'where we stand' is 
inevitable one day, so now is better. - Is it Unix or NotUnix? (Adrift?)

FWIW, I think NotUnix can work quite happily within a larger 'Unix User' 
agglomeration. Educational tasks would just be a lot easier if this was 
made explicit.

And it would finally resolve the gutless, hostile and unfounded 
prejudice GNU faces within (a limited?) 'CLUG'.

> And there's a huge difference between the traffic of a beginners group
> with that of an administrators' group. Any group that welcomes beginners
> should be supportive of approchable higher-level users, otherwise not
> much help is possible.

True. Both need be catered for. But resolution of any conflict of 
interest is the responsibility of the old hands, and their 
(GNU-oppressive) propaganda content is simply invalid.

Maybe this beginner was unusual in arriving with GNU awareness. But he 
wouldn't be the last. GNU needs recognition too. (More, some would say, 
but definitely not none).

>> One would be enough, and could then share pride in being the first and 
>> only GNU/Linux User Group in Australasia (beyond India).
> 
> Where's the pride in being "GNU/Linux" when you could be "Free Software
> Foundation NZ"? Some might also say that "Open Source" includes FSF &
> others, but at some point perhaps you can split hairs further than is
> useful.

If someone wants to propose that, I'd help explore it. Walking before 
running is the safest bet tho. A GLUG anyone can do, but the FSFNZ would 
have dues to pay - at the least. A stage 2 to aim for perhaps? Not sure 
what the 'franchise' details are as yet. A different goal, in time.

>> .02c, & no offense intended
> 
> Ditto. Especially as I'm "challenging" what Rik is saying, and I know
> how hard he works towards these community goals.
> 
> -jim

None taken. Good, healthy debate, if you ask me. About time too.

Thanks (& for hosting it/us),
-- 
Rik