RMS interview

[Bernhard Reiter]

On Wed, Jul 10, 2002 at 02:16:30AM +0200, Rainer Trusch wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Jul 2002, Bernhard Reiter wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 02, 2002 at 10:03:29PM +0200, Rainer Trusch wrote:
> >> On Tue, 25 Jun 2002, Bernhard Reiter wrote:
> >> > On Tue, Jun 25, 2002 at 09:38:00PM +0200, Rainer Trusch wrote:

> I don't disagree with the four freedoms and a license like yast
> disqualifies a programm for me (apart from a game perhaps ;-) ). At
> certain discussion there should space for a bit more differentiation,
> which was important for my original point. 

I agree in that differentiation is needed sometimes.

> > I did talk about control.  Without the actual permission to study
> > the inner working of things and publish the results, you cannot
> > effectively contol it.  Thus democratic control means to have the
> > right processes in place.  Like neighbours studing all new versions
> > and the source code of software.  The "four freedoms" ensure that
> > the process can be established.
> 
> Sorry Bernhard, I don't get the point, even trying hard. The RMS
> statement was basically about control over your computer and your
> conclusion sounds very abstract. 

Yes it is abstract, which does not make it less relevant.

> I assume we are discussing about
> arguments for others and not to assure people in the list. As I stated
> in another mail about the other control arguments, they are good
> arguments for free software, but I doubt less technical persons, who
> aren't into the free software issue, would identify these arguments as
> control or would even think of them without a longer discussion like
> we had.

Feel free to come up with a line of argumentation
that will be more accessible to the people you want to approach.
In general I've made good experiences with giving 
the abstract but short reasons and then elaborating examples
based on what the persons are interested in.

> Free software is going beyond the
> freak stadium and language has to to be adepted.

We are grateful for any help to make Free Software and its values 
more accessable to a wider audience.

> The new booklet of the FSF Europe is a positive example, whiches uses
> a clear language. You see, I'm not just complaining :-)

Good. :)
We are trying to improve so all feedback is of course welcome.







-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.fsfe.org/pipermail/discussion/attachments/20020711/20dd2571/attachment.sig>