[Liverpool] A history of Liverpool Linux User Group

[Daniel Hartley]

I have been thinking of responding again to this. I realise that I have 
as of yet not attended any meeting. However, as an ethnographic 
researcher interested in the notion of 'freedom' I think what I have to 
say might have some relevance.

As an outsider, the definition of freedom that has been given by Bob, I 
think, is in itself restrictive, as I think Sebastian suggested in his 
nice metaphor of religious freedom. To limit what can be talked about 
within the Linux User Group, to me, as an outsider, seems to imitate 
similar practices as Windows and Apple etc., employ to defend their 
market share: it is, essentially, the defining of a distinct territory, 
and an excluding of anything which is not authorised to be within that 
space. This is pure strategic practice in the business world, and for 
me, again as still an outsider, it does not make me want to come to 
meetings any more than I would if there was some compensation for a 
broader definition of software freedom.

By instead distinguishing neat boundaries and defining everything that 
is concealed within the Linux territory as 'Linux and Free software' 
only, it limits the extent to which I may want and be able to enter. The 
majority of computer users- those potential newcomers who somehow may 
one day become Linux users - are Windows based, so naturally there is an 
interest in what these behemoths are doing; even if that interest is 
still restricted to the impact of UEFI lock on the ability to install 
Linux systems (which afterall effects new and well seasoned Linux users 
alike).

It does not make me feel any more welcome. Instead it creates the 
impression that Linux users are like those mythical creatures that are 
caricatured by the responses I sometimes get, from Windows and Apple 
users, when I declare I am a user of Linux: the territory is an isolated 
space, like an island, where the local, quite reclusively, attempt to 
defend themselves from more powerful nation states. If Linux was going 
to bring in more new comers (though I still dont really understand this 
incessant desire to educate, evangelize and colonise new spaces), then I 
believe its boundaries should be more permeable and aware to its 
historical and institutional relations, for these are the sources of new 
opportunity and potency.

I realise I have no real legitimacy adding my commentary (because I'm 
not an authorised member of the territory, yet), but I am one of these 
potential newcomers to meetings and the group so thought those wanting 
to delineate boundaries yet somehow seduce others might be slightly 
interested.

No offence intended: I think more significantly this is a discussion 
that is being had regarding the nature of freedom itself, and 
definitions of freedom, ultimately, should be alive to other even 
contrasting visions of something that is really important in our lives.

As I said, I see this discussion as much more important than just 
talking about Linux or Windows or whatever. I think it is a central 
topic that affects us all, and is software freedom- in practice. I 
therefore think it is really sad that Bob feels that he has to leave and 
would suggest that the nature of software freedom and its definition 
would be a brilliant topic for a talk.

Daniel



On 05/09/12 16:23, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Tue, 04 Sep 2012 22:31:00 +0100, Bob Ham wrote:
>
>> As promised, below is a history of LivLUG.
> Thanks for this Bob.
>
>
>> On 18th of August 2012, the LUG held an official Saturday meeting
>> around its stall at OggCamp 2012.  At this meeting, Bob announced that
>> he would be stepping down as a volunteer for the LUG and no longer
>> attending meetings.  This was followed by an email to the mailing list
>> in which Bob stated his reasoning: he was stepping down in protest
>> against the LUG's disregard for issues of software freedom.
> I take issue with this though. The LUG does not disregard software
> freedom, as evidenced by the number of people attending talks by Same
> Tuke and Michael Dorrington. The LUG does not have a formal position on
> software freedom, but that is not the same thing as disregarding it.
>
>> In the
>> humble opinion of the author, this represents the end of the third era
>> of Liverpool LUG.
> I disagree with that too. The previous two eras ended because those doing
> the bulk of the organisation stopped doing so for whatever reasons they
> had. By announcing and explaining your leaving, and giving time for a
> transition of responsibilities, you haver ensured that there is no reason
> for the group to flounder as it has in the past. Thank you for that.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Liverpool mailing list
> Liverpool at mailman.lug.org.uk
> https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/liverpool

-- 
/dhartley.net <http://www.dhartley.net>/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.lug.org.uk/pipermail/liverpool/attachments/20120905/e051f866/attachment.htm>