Matthias Kirschner wrote:
Sid Dabster wrote:
Not trying to start a flame war, but will people please stop saying "We do not want a multi-issue party" when the proposal was for a"single issue party"
Why do you think that a "single issue party" makes sense? And what do you think will be better with a "single issue party" then with a interest group??? Can you give me one example of a successful "single issue party"?
The Legalise Cannabis Alliance/Party was started in Norwichin 1997, where I live, by a few ex-Labour party members. I would like to say that while I am completely against the use of Cannabis even I have to admit how successful they have been. For over 15 years the Green Party (and some in the Liberal Democrats) have wanted to legalisation but it made no difference. After LCP was formed they stood in a handful of seats (five) and within a few years the government had reduce the criminal offence of carrying it to virtual nothing and started trials of Cannabis for medical use. The turn around was so big that the LCA candidate at the Ipswich byelection was asked why are you still standing when you have got what you want? LCA could also used joint candidates, anybody already in a party could support them and their own party. All this happened in spite of the fact opersition to legalise is large. Today I have managed to get Steve Ballmer's office fax number, if we had group we could on mass fax that number at particular day. I will not give out the number until I have been able to use it, I will see if one of the other posters here is right and I get sued. It maybe decided wether to start a new party in the UK on the 20th March at a meeting in Norwich. In summary LCA candidates who got 1.5% or less of the votes (where they stood), but had power far out weighing their support, thanks to standing as a single issue party. People who have not stood for election are naturally reluctent to stand through fear of the unknown, but this is why politicians taking them more seriously if they do because it shows how strongly they feel about their issue. I did not want to use the LCA example but it seemed the only way to explain my case. I hope have not upset anyone, but I feel compeled to do something because I feel so strongly about this issue. This month I have been trying to by a Mac Mini to run Linux on but have gone to three Mac Dealers, two are bust and the third does not sell computers anymore and is sticking to other parts of it's business.
______________________________________________________________________ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
Hi Sid, some questions:
* Sid Dabster sid_dabster@yahoo.ca [2005-03-14 14:57:58 -0500]:
The Legalise Cannabis Alliance/Party was started in Norwichin 1997, where I live, by a few ex-Labour party members.
Is Norwichin a city? In Canada? How many people are living there?
no difference. After LCP was formed they stood in a handful of seats (five) and within a few years the government had reduce the criminal offence of carrying it to virtual nothing and started trials of Cannabis for medical use.
The government of Norwichin or the government of your country?
[...]
Today I have managed to get Steve Ballmer's office fax number, if we had group we could on mass fax that number at particular day. I will not give out the number until I have been able to use it, I will see if one of the other posters here is right and I get sued. It maybe decided wether to start a new party in the UK on the 20th March at a meeting in Norwich.
Sorry, I don't understand this paragraph. How is Steven Ballmer's office fax number related to that issue? What do you want to sent him? Would you like to ask him if he joins the party???
[...]
I hope have not upset anyone, but I feel compeled to do something because I feel so strongly about this issue.
I think there are better ways to do something then founding a political party if you want to help Free Software. Help building a local Free Software organisation which focus on the political issues.
With best wishes, Matze
I think there are better ways to do something then founding a political party if you want to help Free Software. Help building a local Free Software organisation which focus on the political issues.
This was exactly was i thought before a few minutes. I guess this would be a great idea. A political party is not exactly what we want (i know java but not how to care about how to increase common wealth)- but a organisation who talks directly to the politicans and organizes political protest could be exactly what Free Software needs. If we would have an organisation (some kind of club, german word would be "verein") which focusses on poltic- great.
BTW there is some organisation which is doing exactly this in germany. I forgot the name, but you have to pay >1000 Euro to participate.
Cheers Chris
PS: how can i contribute this mailinglist without sending my post first to the moderator? i subscribed, but it seems i have no direct write access.
Hello Chris,
* Chris. Grobmeier grobmeier@neotecc.net [2005-03-16 11:20:44 +0100]:
I guess this would be a great idea. A political party is not exactly what we want (i know java but not how to care about how to increase common wealth)- but a organisation who talks directly to the politicans and organizes political protest could be exactly what Free Software needs.
This organisation already exists :) The FSFE is doing this since the beginning.
If we would have an organisation (some kind of club, german word would be "verein") which focusses on poltic- great.
That's exactly why Fellowship [1] was started. Please read the announcement of the Fellowship [2]. The Fellowship is IMHO the best place for people who care about those issues.
BTW there is some organisation which is doing exactly this in germany. I forgot the name, but you have to pay >1000 Euro to participate.
The Fellowship costs 120 EUR / 60 EUR reduced (for students etc.).
PS: how can i contribute this mailinglist without sending my post first to the moderator? i subscribed, but it seems i have no direct write access.
I'll sent you an PM about that.
Best wishes, Matze
1. http://www.fsfe.org 2. http://mail.fsfeurope.org/pipermail/press-release/2005q1/000094.html
At Wed, 16 Mar 2005 12:18:50 +0100, Matthias Kirschner wrote:
- Chris. Grobmeier grobmeier@neotecc.net [2005-03-16 11:20:44 +0100]:
I guess this would be a great idea. A political party is not exactly what we want (i know java but not how to care about how to increase common wealth)- but a organisation who talks directly to the politicans and organizes political protest could be exactly what Free Software needs.
This organisation already exists :) The FSFE is doing this since the beginning.
If we would have an organisation (some kind of club, german word would be "verein") which focusses on poltic- great.
That's exactly why Fellowship [1] was started. Please read the announcement of the Fellowship [2]. The Fellowship is IMHO the best place for people who care about those issues.
Besides the FSFE, there also is the FFII (which is an associate organisation of the FSFE). See http://www.ffii.org. You can also sign up at http://aktiv.ffii.org. :-)
Jeroen Dekkers
--- Matthias Kirschner mk@fsfe.org wrote:
Hi Sid, some questions:
- Sid Dabster sid_dabster@yahoo.ca [2005-03-14
14:57:58 -0500]:
The Legalise Cannabis Alliance/Party was started
in
Norwich in 1997, where I live, by a few ex-Labour
party
members.
Is Norwich a city? In Canada? How many people are living there?
Norwich is a city in England, about 120,000 live there.
no difference. After LCP was formed they stood in
a
handful of seats (five) and within a few years the
government had reduce the criminal offence of carrying it to virtual nothing and started trials of Cannabis for medical use.
The government of Norwich or the government of your country?
The government of the UK. I cannot make the meeting in Norwich on the 20th March, because of a clash with another meeting I going to.
[...]
I hope have not upset anyone, but I feel compeled
to do something
because I feel so strongly about this issue.
I think there are better ways to do something then founding a political party if you want to help Free Software. Help building a local Free Software organisation which focus on the political issues.
Several people have said pressure groups are better, and hinted that they exist, I know of no multi-platform anti-M$ pressure group. In fact one of the main problems is that there is no medium sized or large organisation against Microsoft and everyone is complaining on their own in isolation, and feeling powerless.
______________________________________________________________________ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
Hi Sid, thank you for your answers.
* Sid Dabster sid_dabster@yahoo.ca [2005-03-16 07:09:00 -0500]:
Several people have said pressure groups are better, and hinted that they exist, I know of no multi-platform anti-M$ pressure group.
There are organisations or initiatives _for_ Free Software, _for_ innovation [2] (sometimes also called "anti-patents"), _for_ intellectual wealth [1] etc.
With best wishes, Matze
1. http://www.fsfeurope.org/documents/wiwo.en.html 2. http://www.fsfeurope.org/projects/swpat/swpat.en.html
On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 07:09:00 -0500 (EST), Sid Dabster sid_dabster@yahoo.ca wrote:
I think there are better ways to do something then founding a political party if you want to help Free Software. Help building a local Free Software organisation which focus on the political issues.
Several people have said pressure groups are better, and hinted that they exist, I know of no multi-platform anti-M$ pressure group. In fact one of the main problems is that there is no medium sized or large organisation against Microsoft and everyone is complaining on their own in isolation, and feeling powerless.
So is this Political party you propose a pro-Linux party or a anti-Microsoft party? Because being pro-Linux and anti-Microsoft ARE NOT MUTALLY EXCLUSIVE!!!
First of all in order to sell your manifesto to impartial observers whose support you want to gather you can't go in there just saying "I am anti-Microsoft"
The term anti is a negative term, it's going to make you sound like a bitter oddball. I think the only terms I could give my support to that include the term 'anti' would possibly 'anti-software patent' because software patents are an issue that do affect a majority of people (anyone who uses a computer) and patents have a social impact on most peoples lives (preventing innovation, restricting freedom of expression etc)
Also possibly depending on other circumstances anti-war may be an acceptable political point-of-view.
But simply being anti-Microsoft is not going to get you any serious support.
Explain to your electorate *why* you are anti-Microsoft... practice that spiel on us first.
Are you anti-Microsoft because they support the use of Software Patents? If so then you need to describe your party as an anti-software patent movement (which by the way I would be behind much more than your current idea)... as IBM are currently the worlds biggest holder of software patents.... Novell must be in there too as well as companies such as Sun, SCO etc.
Is using Microsoft Windows Server any more or less ethical in terms of the Free software ethos than using say Novell Netware? Neither are free, neither protect the freedom of rights of their users.
What about Solaris on SPARC? That is a non-free OS. Are you also campaigning against Sun?
Are you suggesting running a anti-MS party because they are anti-competitive? Well this has already been through the courts and they have been fined. What is your answer to that when your electorate asks?
( Can I just say at this point I am neither a MS user or apologist. I just don't like Linux users to be portrayed as fanatical anti-Microsoft campaigners simply because it is fashionable. There needs to be substance to this stance as well )
You need to chip away at the practices that makes MS an unsavoury company. The fact they don't protect the freedom of their users, their strategy of locking users in, their practice of selling software to poor 3rd world countries and forcing them into a expensive upgrade cycle.
Being Anti-MS isn't enough
~sm
Simon Morris wrote:
On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 07:09:00 -0500 (EST), Sid Dabster wrote:
I think there are better ways to do something
then
founding a political party if you want to help
Free
Software. Help building a local Free Software organisation which focus on the
political
issues.
Several people have said pressure groups are
better,
and hinted that they exist, I know of no multi-platform anti-M$ pressure group. In fact one of the main problems is that there is no medium
sized
or large organisation against Microsoft and
everyone
is complaining on their own in isolation, and
feeling
powerless.
So is this Political party you propose a pro-Linux party or a anti-Microsoft party? Because being pro-Linux and anti-Microsoft ARE NOT MUTALLY EXCLUSIVE!!!
First of all in order to sell your manifesto to impartial observers whose support you want to gather you can't go in there just saying "I am anti-Microsoft"
Microsoft are an abusive monopoly see <a href="http://www.speccyverse.me.uk/comp/reboot/" target=_blank>http://www.speccyverse.me.uk/comp/reboot/</a> Per Processor licensing means computer manufacturers pay say 50 pounds per computer for M$ Windows whether M$ Windows is shipped on the machine or not. So a copy of Red Hat is 25 pounds then the customer pays indirectly via the the manufacturer 75 pounds (25 for RH + 50 for a non-existant copy of MS Windows). This is just one of the many anti-competitive practises they do, not to mention the poor quality of there software, monoploy margins, closed source, pro-patent approach. Full Windows (i.e. not Windows CE) runs on very few hardware platforms constraining choice to Intel and AMD x86 CPUs. If M$ monopoly did not exist Linux would have a much bigger market share, say 20%, benefiting all users. Micro$oft are famous for their vapourware, a recent example was the annoucement of IE7 to stop the rise of Firefox, and other M$ FUD techniques. As PCs get cheaper Windows (+Office) is costing more and more of the total cost, some users are being criminalised. Microsoft in the past has purposely made rivals software products incompatible or seem incompatiable to damage their sales, this has led to less choice.
The term anti is a negative term, it's going to make you sound like a bitter oddball. I think the only terms I could give my support to that include the term 'anti' would possibly 'anti-software patent' because software patents are an issue that do affect a majority of people (anyone who uses a computer) and patents have a social impact on most peoples lives (preventing innovation, restricting freedom of expression etc)
Also possibly depending on other circumstances anti-war may be an acceptable political point-of-view.
But simply being anti-Microsoft is not going to get you any serious support.
Localy a 2 libraries have closed (Lazar House and Bradwell) because the budget was used on Micro$oft software. Norfolk County Council is spending 10.5 million pounds on PCs in schools while there is a teacher shortage. Once the PC are installed government rules which do not count a PC older than 3 years as existing, mean they have to start back on the tread mill. I wonder if X-Terminals fall under the 3 year rule.
Explain to your electorate *why* you are anti-Microsoft... practice that spiel on us first.
See the rest of my email.
Are you anti-Microsoft because they support the use of Software Patents? If so then you need to describe your party
I am anti-M$ because they a monopoly destroying choice and making people use their poor software, VB Script Virus anyone.
as an anti-software patent movement (which by the way I would be behind much more than your current idea)... as IBM are currently the worlds biggest holder of software patents.... Novell must be in there too as well as companies such as Sun, SCO etc.
Is using Microsoft Windows Server any more or less ethical in terms of the Free software ethos than using say Novell Netware? Neither are free, neither protect the freedom of rights of their users.
What about Solaris on SPARC? That is a non-free OS. Are you also campaigning against Sun?
Sun Microsystems support open systems and claim to be making a lot of Solaris Open Source soon.
Are you suggesting running a anti-MS party because they are anti-competitive? Well this has already been through the courts and they have been fined. What is your answer to that when your electorate asks?
The fine while big to the likes of you and me, to Microsoft and Bill Gates (the biggest fat cat in the world, who's wealth is obscene) the fine was small change.
( Can I just say at this point I am neither a MS user or apologist. I just don't like Linux users to be portrayed as fanatical anti-Microsoft campaigners simply because it is fashionable. There needs to be substance to this stance as well )
You need to chip away at the practices that makes MS an unsavoury company. The fact they don't protect the freedom of their users, their strategy of locking users in, their practice of selling software to poor 3rd world countries and forcing them into a expensive upgrade cycle.
Not just the 3rd world.
Being Anti-MS isn't enough
That why I suggested a Free Software Party originally, called the Linux Party, perhaps Free Software Party would be better even if less catchy.
______________________________________________________________________ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
On 17-Mar-2005, Sid Dabster wrote:
Simon Morris wrote:
Explain to your electorate *why* you are anti-Microsoft... practice that spiel on us first.
See the rest of my email.
Now take that spiel and turn it into things you are *for*, i.e. things you will change, results you will achieve if your party gains some form of power in government.
You'll get much better results if people know what you want to *do*, rather than what you want to *stop* someone else doing.
Being Anti-MS isn't enough
That why I suggested a Free Software Party originally, called the Linux Party, perhaps Free Software Party would be better even if less catchy.
I think naming the party after a single software program is even more silly than naming it after the name of a single corporation. Having "free" in the name seems a good step.
How about Digital Freedom party? (most of your issues are with restriction of freedoms in the digital sphere)
Free Culture party? (software is culture, and the issues you speak of affect culture more broadly than just software)
On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 09:07:16 +1100, Ben Finney ben@benfinney.id.au wrote:
That why I suggested a Free Software Party originally, called the Linux Party, perhaps Free Software Party would be better even if less catchy.
I think naming the party after a single software program is even more silly than naming it after the name of a single corporation. Having "free" in the name seems a good step.
How about Digital Freedom party? (most of your issues are with restriction of freedoms in the digital sphere)
Free Culture party? (software is culture, and the issues you speak of affect culture more broadly than just software)
I like this idea. You need to spread the culture of Free software as well as the end product (Linux and GNU)
A good hook here would be campaigning against the kind of practices that Music companies employ to prevent our freedom (DMCA)
Thanks
~sm
Simon Morris wrote:
I like this idea. You need to spread the culture of Free software as well as the end product (Linux and GNU)
A good hook here would be campaigning against the kind of practices that Music companies employ to prevent our freedom (DMCA)
I think what people are looking for is something like hipatia (http://www.hipatia.info/) which connects activists across Latin America/Spain/Italy and India. Hipatia generalizes from free software to 'promote freedom of (and free sharing of) knowledge, as the right of all human beings to access, use, create, modify and distribute knowledge freely and openly'. It works as a pressure group and an NGO rather than a party. At the moment most communication in Hipatia is in Spanish/Portuguese, but there are hooks to build up an english language side too (or french, or german, or ...)
Graham
Thanks
~sm _______________________________________________ Discussion mailing list Discussion@fsfeurope.org https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 11:50:41 +0000, Graham Seaman graham@theseamans.net wrote:
I think what people are looking for is something like hipatia (http://www.hipatia.info/) which connects activists across Latin America/Spain/Italy and India.
Looks great.. what do they do apart from the website?
My foreign language skills aren't good enough to tell from the site.
Are they active in the UK at all?
~sm
Simon Morris wrote:
On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 11:50:41 +0000, Graham Seaman graham@theseamans.net wrote:
I think what people are looking for is something like hipatia (http://www.hipatia.info/) which connects activists across Latin America/Spain/Italy and India.
Looks great.. what do they do apart from the website?
Website itself is mainly a document repository (there are also an attached news site and wiki), but so far it hasn't really been the core of things, which is the mailing lists.
As individuals, many members are involved with use of free software in their national government/public services (eg. Venezuela, Brazil, Peru), and hipatia has been a way of co-ordinating this internationally. Also strongly involved with the World Social Forums, trying to provide free software services for the events and to convince NGOs linked with the Social Forums they should be using FS. Also following events in WIPO related to patents, software etc. And developing ideas on human rights/digital rights. But it isn't the kind of organization that works like a party with everyone following one party line - more a bunch of people with related ideas/interests who help one another, there's lots more things going on that I haven't mentioned.
My foreign language skills aren't good enough to tell from the site.
Nearly all the most interesting documents are in Spanish, and not translated yet :-(
Are they active in the UK at all?
As far as I know there are only two members from the UK (none from the US). And we never organized anything in the UK at all. There's an english language mailing list, but so far it's totally quiet. I don't know how to get round that - I think one reason for Hipatia's success so far is exactly that it doesn't make people communcate in english.
Graham
~sm
On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 13:02:41 -0500 (EST), Sid Dabster sid_dabster@yahoo.ca wrote:
See the rest of my email.
[Snip rest of previous email about MS]
OK, I agree with you there. To be honest I am a little sceptical about the claim that 2 libraries shut purely because of MS licencing fees, but I also hate to see public money being pumped into Microsofts bank account when there are real alternatives. The NHS/MS contract recently for example
What about Solaris on SPARC? That is a non-free OS. Are you also campaigning against Sun?
Sun Microsystems support open systems and claim to be making a lot of Solaris Open Source soon.
Oooh, I don't know about that. I think Suns involvement with Open Source is out of necessity rather than anything else.
IT trends over the past few years have been big on migration, but interestingly not so much on the Windows vs other OS front. There apparently seem to be roughly the same percentage of Windows vs non-Windows OS's out there.
But what is happening is that organisations are migrating to Intel away from other architectures. This really hurts Sun.
Given the choice I think Sun would prefer to go back to the good old days of them selling Solaris by the truckload and maybe they wish Linux wasn't around
With this anti-MS sentiment in this thread don't forget both the FSF and Linux were evolved from frustration about the lack of freedom in traditional UNIX systems, not Windows.
That why I suggested a Free Software Party originally, called the Linux Party, perhaps Free Software Party would be better even if less catchy.
I agree that *something* needs to be done, and I'm glad that you are motivated enough to do it, honestly.
However I just think that a political party is energy exerted in the wrong direction.
Anyway, thanks
~sm
On Thu, 2005-03-17 at 13:02 -0500, Sid Dabster wrote:
What about Solaris on SPARC? That is a non-free OS. Are you also campaigning against Sun?
Sun Microsystems support open systems and claim to be making a lot of Solaris Open Source soon.
Open Systems has nothing to do with Free Software. Open Systems, ALSO, has nothing to do with Open Source.
The most likely to be a proper definition of an "open" system is a POSIX compliant operating system.
The "source" Sun is giving out is ONLY "open source" if you are in the context of Solaris. Use Free Software instead of Solaris, and they can sue you for patent infringement if they think they can get away with it: the patent promise is _only_ for Solaris context.
Suns definition of Open is you can open and look, maybe smell, but don't you think you can touch without our approval.
Being Anti-MS isn't enough
That why I suggested a Free Software Party originally, called the Linux Party, perhaps Free Software Party would be better even if less catchy.
Your reasoning for a political party is each time less honest. In the future, anyone searching for Sid Dabster + free software might find links to this mailing list's archives, like your mail
http://mailman.fsfeurope.org/pipermail/discussion/2005-March/004871.html
...and find such shallow sources for your motivation.
You're in a dangerous path. Dangerous because you'll likely do more harm than any good at all. Just looking at your motivations here gives glass feet to your party.
Rui
On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 16:35:59 +0000, Rui Miguel Seabra rms@1407.org wrote:
Open Systems has nothing to do with Free Software. Open Systems, ALSO, has nothing to do with Open Source.
The most likely to be a proper definition of an "open" system is a POSIX compliant operating system.
Indeed
The "source" Sun is giving out is ONLY "open source" if you are in the context of Solaris. Use Free Software instead of Solaris, and they can sue you for patent infringement if they think they can get away with it: the patent promise is _only_ for Solaris context.
Suns definition of Open is you can open and look, maybe smell, but don't you think you can touch without our approval.
Yep. Again a form of vapour-ware. Sun talks the language of Open Source without the commitments. They 'open-sourced' Project Looking Glass but it sits on top of Java which is non-free so I don't see the whole benefit in that
Their GNU/Linux distribution "Sun Java Desktop" is laden with non-free additions, and is no-more free than a proprietary OS (even though you can see the source for most of the distro)
Question from me: What licence is Solaris on the i386 architecture going to be released under and has the FSF considered it to be a free licence?
In my opinion you can think of this as a sliding scale. At one end we have Microsoft who are anti-open source in the extreme, going to the lengths of trying to discredit it (comparing to communism, anti-American etc), you have companies like Sun and IBM slightly further along the scale who are now talking about Open source in positive terms and contributing but maybe only because it makes business sense for them to do so.
We then have organisations such as Red Hat, Mandrake and SUSE whose entire business is based on open source..... but still sometimes encourage non-free activities and practices to maintain their profit
(OK - I just made a wild assumption there with nothing to back it up. Someone help me. What are Red Hat and SUSE doing these days that is non-free??? SUSE GPL'd YAST a while back which used to be closed.... Red Hat had a restrictive licence on it's images and logos etc. What are these guys doing now days???)
And then at the other end of the scale we have the Debian Project and the FSF.
I have no objections to the companies in the middle of the scale and what they are doing. They are contributing a lot to the Open Source community in terms of finance and backing, but I personally don't hold the romantic illusion that they are doing it out of love. They are doing it for profit, but we are benefitting also
Being Anti-MS isn't enough
That why I suggested a Free Software Party originally, called the Linux Party, perhaps Free Software Party would be better even if less catchy.
Your reasoning for a political party is each time less honest. In the future, anyone searching for Sid Dabster + free software might find links to this mailing list's archives, like your mail
http://mailman.fsfeurope.org/pipermail/discussion/2005-March/004871.html
...and find such shallow sources for your motivation.
Before I clicked the link I thought you were linking to this email
http://mail.fsfeurope.org/pipermail/discussion/2005-March/004851.html
"Sid" (what *is* your real name by the way?), I'm really not trying to knock you for what you are proposing. You obviously have the motivation to do a lot of good, but I do object to the implementation here.
Political parties gain enemies quickly. The only people that treat GNU/Linux and Open Source as an enemy currently are the type of people that profit from restricting peoples freedoms.
We should be trying to guide and advise political parties as to the way ahead.
Thanks
~sm