[Liverpool] Departure

[Dan Lynch]

I've been waiting a couple of days to think about this in the post-OggCamp
exhaustion haze. I'm going to be lazy and top-post I'm afraid. It's far
easier on the phone.

Firstly I would like to echo everyone's sentiments in thanking you Bob for
your hard work keeping the LUG running in recent years. We *WILL* miss you.

I think Neil is right on the money. We're a Linux group or if you prefer a
GNU/Linux group. I love the GNU project, I have friends who are directors
of FSF and I try to promote software freedom everywhere I can. However, we
are not billed as Liverpool Free Software Society. We're Liverpool LUG and
the L stands for Linux. When asked in the pub if I would be "happy" to have
a talk about proprietary software at LivLUG I said "no" on principal. I
then said I'd like to hear more about the context of any such talk before
making a final decision. My default position is still no, we should not
have talks about proprietary software at LivLUG. It would take a special
case to change my mind on that but I'm willing to discuss it. The word
"happy" is misleading, as Neil has already eloquently pointed out.

I noticed you used the word "inclusive" as if that's a bad thing. On the
contrary I take that as a compliment. If our group is inclusive and
tolerant of others then nothing makes me happier. You can't win people over
to your cause by being puritanical, it only scares them away. We have to
introduce people to Free & Open Source software in a friendly way and build
up more Free Software philosophy as they get more familar. Hitting them
over the head with the GNU manifesto is stupid and destructive. I'm not
accusing you of doing this Bob because I know you're a reasonable guy. But
I do regularly see people taking this approach as if it's a holy war. This
is NOT how you win hearts and minds. You have to open and approachable
first, then you can reel them in.

I respect your position Bob and I'm sorry we seem to differ in approach. I
do take issue with the statement that working for LivLUG is to work against
Free Software and I find that insulting. Nevertheless I am not upset or
angry. I hope some day you may feel you can return to the group and you are
certainly most welcome.

So to summarize. I'll miss you, I thank you, and I respect your feelings,
but make no mistake. LivLUG will continue and we'll grow bigger and
stronger. Promoting Free & Open Source Software in a pragmatic way.

I hope we'll still see you socially and we all remain friends. No doubt
about that :)

Best wishes,

Dan




On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Neil Bothwick <neil at stfw.net> wrote:

> On Wed, 22 Aug 2012 22:07:06 +0100, Bob Ham wrote:
>
> > For those who were not at OggCamp, I have to announce that I am stepping
> > down as a volunteer for LivLUG and I will no longer be attending
> > meetings.
>
> I'll be sorry to see you go and thank you for all your efforts in
> keeping the group organised and finding speakers.
>
> > For some time now I've felt a disquiet about the character of the LUG,
> > in general but also specifically in relation to free software.  The LUGs
> > that I have been involved with in the past have always supported free
> > software.  I had been labouring under the assumption that LivLUG was no
> > different.  The original LivLUG website of 2005 stated that:
> >
> >   “The purpose of the group is to promote the use of GNU/Linux and Free
> >   Software, and to bring the users of Liverpool together.”
> >
> > However, it has become increasingly clear that this description is not
> > accurate.  The issue came to a head at the Wednesday meeting this month
> > when I asked whether people would be happy to have a talk about
> > proprietary software, if it ran on Linux.  To my dismay but sadly not to
> > my surprise, the answer was yes, people would be happy.
>
> I'm not sure "happy" is the right term, more an acceptance that
> proprietary software running on Linux is relevant to Linux users, whether
> in a positive or negative way.
>
> The problem arises with the original description - Linux AND Free
> Software. Since Linux includes proprietary software, whether it be binary
> firmware blobs or big programs like VMware, any all-encompassing
> discussion of all things Linux will fail on the free software part of the
> description. Adding Android complicates things even further.
>
> We need to decide if we are a Linux group first or a Free Software group,
> and the name is a good indicator of where our priorities lie. Of course
> Free Software is important to Linux, and the majority of it is free, but
> demanding 100% free means we can't cover 100% Linux. It's a matter of
> priorities.
>
>
> --
> Neil Bothwick
>
> And if you say "No", I shall be forced to shoot you.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Liverpool mailing list
> Liverpool at mailman.lug.org.uk
> https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/liverpool
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.lug.org.uk/pipermail/liverpool/attachments/20120823/6970e724/attachment.htm>