[GNUz] How does GLU/GNUz differ from CLUG?

[Pia Waugh]

<quote who="Rik Tindall">

> Over time, brand "Linux" is more and more conforming to that market 
> trend, successfully. Which undermines the point made above and explains 
> why occasional newcomers, attracted from whatever liberal non-programmer 
> background by GNU/*, face such a shock of cold water when reaching a "LUG".

I don't think that's true at all. Most people that come to the SLUG (Sydney
LUG) are amazed and think it much better than they imagined. It includes
basic news where everyone can share information or issues, then a general
talk, then we all split into two groups, one for a specific technical talk
and another more general talk, so something for everyone.

> N.B. If they don't state "GNU/LUG" in their name, then they are 
> un/willingly rejecting what RMS has explicitly recommended - for honesty 
> and social codebase value - and so they are _not_ GNU/LUGs but "LUGs" 
> (contrarily). That much is cut and dried.

I think the main difference between a LUG and a GNU/LUG is that the latter
is political and the former is more about geeks just getting together for
fun. I think that many people come to the community firstly from a technical
perspective and it can take them years to understand the bigger story, the
socio-economic impact of FLOSS on the world. I know it took me 3 years, I
started using Linux in particular from a Windows background and in the very
true words I heard once, "I came for the quality and stayed for the
freedom". I think it is naive to create a place for people to come for the
philosophy but not for the tech, when it is the tech community from which
much of this springs. And the fact that many tech people use FLOSS for the
tech and not for the philosophy isn't a bad thing, we are all part of a
large and complex community with many different goals. Most of our community
are involved in specific software projects (like GNOME, Apache, Moodle,
whatever), many of us are involved in local UGs (LUGs, GNU/LUGs, PUGs,
PyUGs, etc) and then there are people for which the politics and philosophy
is everything, and that's great too.

I guess what I'm saying in a long-winded way is that being judgemental about
what is the right and wrong way for our community is very much sitting on a
high horse that doesn't help you, and unecessarily divides our community.
Sharing our resources is really important so we can all do better. Software
Freedom Day is a great example of our _entire_ community comming together
based on our common values of software freedom, regardless of what they want
to call their group.

> But you're right, if one sticks around LUGs long enough, one can see the 
> GNU goodness seeping up through the floorboard cracks - despite the 
> market drifters / AT&T backsliders dousing from their buckets of tar :)

What does this mean?

> I can't tell you how angry I am at having to battle this unexpected and 
> suffocating layer, to get at the GNU culture I expected to be mainstream 
> in "Linux" life.

What do you mean by GNU culture? The freedoms and values we've discussed I
do find in mainstream FLOSS communities, including many LUGs.

> There are just a few, but specific determinants as to which 
> "FOSS"/"FLOSS" term we should most frequently. These are, imho, the most 
> important:
> 
> a) "FOSS" is an abbreviation of "FLOSS", and both are legitimate usages 
> for much the same thing - see * above.

I disagree. I kind of like FLOSS because it makes the libre, the freedom
part more obvious. Many people have become wrapped up with either "free
software" or "open source software", so FOSS kind of just merges them,
whereas FLOSS makes more obvious to us english speakers, for which "free" is
so readily interpreted as cheap quality or no cost, the freedom bit, libre.

> c) The choice we face is political, where a minority wishes to muddy the 
> consumer waters by pushing the longer acronym as much as possible;  why?

That is funny coming from someone wanting to push GNU/LUGs instead of LUGs
;)

> 0) The freedom to promote "FOSS" - along with the majority that have 
> already so decided to do - is absolutely implicit in FLOSS libre, and 
> many will fight "FLOSS" marketing, in favour of "FOSS", to the hilt. - 
> *For the sake of simpler marketing!* and more.

I'm involved in many national and international groups, and FLOSS seems
quite popular.

> Simply put, Don - then new to our "LUG", and raw to SFD - was asked only 
> one thing by way of specific contribution to our SFD Team; and that was 
> to please not muddy the consumer waters by adding "FLOSS" into two 
> years' local SFD/FOSS promotional work, in his support of us. A simple 
> enough request; and yet this was precisely, and singularly, the argument 
> he rose in significantly undermining SFD/Christchurch.

Rik, I think you have your heart in the right place here, but honestly who
are you to tell someone else what they can and can't do? It goes against the
very basis of our community and values, freedom. If Don wanted to use FLOSS
then that is ok. In the same way if you want to have a GNU/LUG and someone
else wants a LUG, that is also ok. If someone wanted to start up a totally
seperate SFD event with slightly different marketing, really that should be
ok. In Australia we have around 20 teams last year, some of whom did geeky
things, some of whom did picnics, some that focused on the AusUS FTA and
some that focused on software freedom for pensioners. There is room for
everyone :) There is no need for all this conflict.

Anyway, I apologise for getting so involved considering this is a local
discussion for NZ, but I saw the question about whether Australia had a
GNU/LUG and just wanted to answer that query. After that I guess I've felt
like Rik doesn't value the contributions of people like me who don't use the
"right" terminology, hence my long response. There will be no more
contribution to this discussion from me.

Cheers,
Pia

-- 
Linux Australia                                         http://linux.org.au/
 
    "If you have any trouble sounding condescending, find a Unix user to
                   show you how it's done." - Scott Adams