Slashdot Mirror
Gnome Preliminary Election Results In
makapuf writes "First results of Gnome Board elections have been issued. They include some well known gnome hackers, Miguel & others, along with Tesla Gwyne, but RMS has not been elected. Remember this is only temporary and see the results on Gnotices. You can see RMS' responses of the application form."
last post!
Results are actually here.
I wonder if it was like real (meaning american politics, voting booth and all that) voting, in that one could put down their own candidate. It would have been funny to see JarJar get in there somewhere..
I wonder if JarJar would have beat out RMS for votes.. they can both be equally annoying at times:
"Yousa call da system GNU/Linux-sa?"
It's actually Telsa Gwynne. Close though. :)
"If he thinks he can hide and run from the United States and our allies, he's sorely mistaken." Bush on bin Laden
RMS has acted as a intolerant stubborn donkey for so long with regard to software that he isn't taken seriously anymore. Even the FSF are getting really tired of him now.
Don't get me wrong, his strong opinions *were* the right attitude when free software was something of a novelty, when the business world was taking the few free software people for lunatics. But that was years ago. Now the world at large at least takes free software seriously, and Stallman has become as useful as a fire hydrant in the middle of a bike trail.
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
However, RMS has demanded a recount in 13 counties, claiming that media bias that he is not a team player has offset the public's perception of him, and thus cost him the election.
Reports have come from a source close to Stallman saying that he is stomping up and down his office and muttering " No? NO!?!!? I invented the fuckin' GUI!!"
More at 10.
1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcf
So, they elected 12 people, but one of them wasn't allowed on, so that leaves them with 11.
Eleven?
Is that right? Why eleven?
It is a wonderful day in the land of GNOME to know that RMS will not be able to ruin the great GUI. GNOME has had many problems lately and having RMS on the GNOME board would have sent it all the way down the crapper. The sun is rising for GNOME once again.
On another note, I would love to see RMS' reaction to his defeat.
You die too easily.
...I think I accidentally voted for Pat Buchanan!
SIGFEH
My personal opinion is that RMS deserve to be on the GNOME foundation board; because he has sacrificed a lot of his lifetime to free software. Even Telsa Gwynne made it to the board, although she has no education, and can't code one line.
Someone call Oprah: now Telsa should get a real makeover!!
md5("Telsa Gwyne") != md5("Telsa Gwynne")
was that of the 11 people who voted and who have gnu.org email addresses only 2 people, including RMS, voted for RMS.
Not that this necessarily means anything particularly significant, I have no idea about what having a gnu.org email address means for a start, it's just vaguely interesting.
Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
I would nearly compare it to environmentalists back in the seventies that wanted to banish all industrial activity because of the pollution. (Anyone recall GreenPeace back then?) They made it clear to the world that we were on the wrong track. The world now has taken a moderate standpoint to environmentalism.
I think that Stallman has done the same for opensource: the IT world now has embraced it but won't take it to the extreme.
History repeats itself in some form or another.
Note for potential flamers: I use the word "extremist" in the context of "someone with extreme viewpoints" not in the current context of "terrorist". Also I wish to note that I have nothing against environemntalists, they need to be there and I respect nature as much as I can.
Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
RMS: Richard M Stallman, founder of the Free Software Foundation, and other Good Things(tm)
*Cough* Karma Whore *Cough*
In retrospect the protection against company dominations could have been stronger. Of those elected:
4 are employed by Ximian
3 are employed by RedHat
3 are without affiliation
1 is employed by Compaq
As it is, Ximian and RedHat together have almost 2/3 of the seats. Both are respectable and honourable companies and I am sure that they will try to keep the viewpoints of the whole GNOME community in mind when they decide issues, but it is hard for them to represent important GNOME backers such as Sun Microsystems.
One can hope that the GNOME Board will consult with the greater community when they are facing important issues. They could invite people with different affiliations as non-voting guests for select meetings, perhaps.
Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
Time will tell if this is a good thing. Perhaps the per-company limit should have been lower (two or three), so that some other companies would have been represented on the board. The current member's affiliations probably do not mirror a large part of the GNOME community.
Wonder if the guy in last place voted for himself ...
I'm sure Telsa won't be too pleased that you mis-typed her name! :-)
Agrajag: "Oh no, not again!"
Or possibly, they're seeing it, and they don't think it's important.
In general, never assume that the reason people don't think things are important is because they don't understand them. Years of evolution has given us a sense of proportion which means that the mass of people is almost never wrong about what's worth bothering with. That's why turnout is so low in Presidential elections.
-- the most controversial site on the Web
..before the election about his suitability for the GNOME board. Seems the voters agreed with me.
As I said I like what RMS is doing, but I don't think he would be able to dedicate the time GNOME deserves
Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
Karma: Chameleon
Too bad he didn't miss being elected by one vote..
---Oh.. oops.. Well, it looks like he did get his vote in later on. But it's still kind of funny that that's the first line.
I dont, but i can understand we care when GNOME a free desktop alternative gets some positive publicity or gets used by a major company like SUN, but i dont need to know anything about the election stuff, sertainly not if its just a RMS troll...
RMS is my hero, no its not, but i respect that man cause he stands for something....and not a lot of people can say that, neither can i...
Quazion.
PS. and again i just had to say something...
Moderation Totals: Flamebait=1, Troll=1, Redundant=1, Insightful=1, Funny=1, Underrated=1, Total=6.
Well, that about covers it...
"If he thinks he can hide and run from the United States and our allies, he's sorely mistaken." Bush on bin Laden
Application Manager Assigned: jordi assigned on 2001-11-25
The following things need to happen still:
"If he thinks he can hide and run from the United States and our allies, he's sorely mistaken." Bush on bin Laden
Isn't Telsa Gwynne Alan Cox's partner?
That must almost make it four RH employees on there - well, she's funded (indirectly) by Red Hat anyway!
Quick! Get Greta Van Susteren in here to tell us what this means. Will there be a re-count?
Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
With a name like Havoc... how much order can he bring to GNOME?
:)
Just kidding...
Or "Good Network Object Model Environment".
However they do it they really need to drop "GNU" from the name of the project. The rational is very simple. The GNU project has very clear and simple goals. The GNOME project also has clear and simple goals. These goals are not the same.
Not by a long shot. Gnome advocates will tell you of the plight of the pore shareware author who must develop his nifty new application for Gnome as the competing desktop is built on a GPLed library. GNU will tell you that the LGPL should only be applied to libraries that provide a function that is already available on other none free operating systems.
On an issue as basic as that, GNU and GNOME disagree. On whether a new proprietary application built on the Gnome foundation is worth mention in the main Gnome news source or promotion on the Gnome website the two organizations disagree.
However GNU was here 1st and its position and ideology have not changed significantly in years. Therefore it's op to Gnome to either conform to that position, change it from within the organization or get the hell out of an organization to which they don't truly belong.
The GNU way will not change. At least not this decade. Gnome will not abandon friendly corporations that happen to do proprietary apps for the platform (sometimes in conjunction with open apps). That leaves only option #3.
Gnome needs to stop calling itself a GNU project because quite frankly it is not. It is worth noting that other massive Open source projects don't have the sort of conflict with GNU that GNOME dose. The Linux Kernel. KDE. Xfree86 and many more. All of them do the on GNU like things GNOME has done but none bring out RMS' fury.
Simply because they don't use his pet project's name for marketing. Some don't even use his license but at least those who do honor the license enough to keep the goat at bay.
--= Isn't it surprising how badly I spell ?
I'm not clear on the difference between open source and free software. Could you show me a piece of free software which is not open source, or a piece of open source software which is not free software?
-russ
Don't piss off The Angry Economist
Since you have to be a contributor to gnome to vote, is it really any surprise these contributors didn't go and elect an outside agitator to be a spokesman?
One can only hope that Telsa feels an affinity towards Hungarian electrical engineers!
-russ
Don't piss off The Angry Economist
with the election results being reported early before they are really known. Do we need this kind of story? Is the point just to make fun of RMS? This is one of the worst Slashdot stories ever.
By declearing the Gnome a GNU project they have invited RMS into the iner circle of Gnome. By turning him away at this juncture they have shown an unreasonable change of heart.
Look at it this way. I can open a church and accept anyone I chuse and refuse anyone I chuse even if I preach the Catholic version of the gospel. (No comparitive thology please. It's important only in that diferent denominations have diferent interpritations for much of the bible) However if I open a Catholic church the Pope must ALWAYS be welcome and I can't alow my prists and nons to mary.
It realy is that simple.
--= Isn't it surprising how badly I spell ?
This is a shameful result for the entire free software community.
If Rhichard Stallman's opinions and the principles he stands for are considered too extremist by some of the most important members of this community, then the free software is a complete nonsense and maybe worse.
I wonder just how many ballots were discarded because RMS supporters complained on them that the voting method wasn't really "FREE"...
Even with a ~150 vote gap, I smell a recount.
--- http://foo.ca
I thought RMS means 'root mean square'.
the requirements for board membership include making significant contributions to the source code/documentation.
These do not include talking about how beneficial open source is.
RMS has to contribute to be a board member.
Also, it is unclear how recent your contributions should be. If I invent the for loop 40 years ago, does that mean that i have a lifetime, perpetual elgibility for board membership?
if RMS has to step into the software fray then you know that something is wrong. So far my read of the comments tells me that RMS is uninterested in the progression of gnome as a "software", only the fact that gnome is heading toward non-freeware environment.
This unfair to the community, who needs to move on the crticial understanding that the economics dicate the direction of the software not a high brow license...IF RMS were to truly help I would ask him to help out with gpl violates that fink is occuring not the joing of some software group.
The issue with RMS' extreme pro-open source position is that, as an extreme position, it is easy to demonize and ignore, taking the more moderate, and reasonable, positions with it. Does he have the best of intentions? at times. But the harm done to the Open Source Community by his foolish guidelines and the juvenile Linux v. GNU/Linux debate is at least as strong.
John Kenneth Fisher
Table of malContents
Huh? Care to explain to someone that doesn't get your point? Thanks.
read the parent, genius
Uhhh well....the "parent" just says something that was known already. Shouldn't a post have more content than that? I wondered whether AnonymousDword had something more substantive to offer. Guess not.
Funny this should come up. I was just thinking to myself earlier this evening about rms, the nature of free software, and his "political baggage".
Here's my feelings: rms is a brilliant technologist. His software (namely emacs and gcc) is used by millions and have become the default tools of an entire industry. The original emacs (written in TECO for ITS) was the first editor of it's type- full-screen, modeless, expandable. A groundbreaking piece of software. Life without gcc is unthinkable.
As a social engineer- a man attempting to create a change in society, he has been very successful. Certainly on the very short list of computer programmers seeking and successfully creating social change. He defined free software. Even if you prefer to call it Open Source (as I very often do. it's easier to explain, I think). Many if not most people who run Linux and (free|net|open)BSD agree that making software free can provide more value to the user, and in the long run, the programming community, than the type of proprietary software that became prevalent in the commercial software industry.
As a Man With A Mission, he's brought hundreds of thousands of people (if not millions) around to his point of view. Whether they know it or not. Certainly, his aim to re-create the free software-oriented environment of the AI Lab/ITS community has succeeded beyond all imagination. He received the McCarther Foundation's Genius award, and those aren't just bandied about.
Free software (built on Linux and other free OS's) have reinvigorated a form of hobbyist computing that had almost completely disappeared by the late 80's, early 90's. For me and millions of others, free software has made computing a fun hobby again. How can you be a hobbyist with nothing to tinker with? Proprietary software is boring.
He gave us the GPL. The GPL is a brilliant legal document and a revolutionary manifesto at the same time. It's simple. It's elegant. Even a non-lawyer can understand it (something you can't say about the typical EULA that comes with windows, etc.) And it has provided a firm foundation for a free software movement. You can tell its working by how much MS hates it. It "breaks the virtuous cycle" of commercial companies building proprietary systems out of free developer's effort. Also, the GPL is the basis for free software companies like Red Hat, Mandrake, et al. Linus' first release of Linux was "for non-commercial use only". The GPL changed his mind.
Even if you're a BSD/X11 license enthusiast, you should know that rms was instrumental in getting the BSD developers to re-implement the proprietary/AT&T-owned pieces of BSD 4.3. Their efforts became the basis for all the open source BSD's.
Some of the credit for these breakthroughs and successful developments goes fairly to rms. If not as the direct player in all of it, then as a prime mover, inspirer, definer, prophet.
Yes prophet. And like the old testament prophets of old, a "A prophet is not without honor except in his own country, among his own relatives, and in his own house." No one likes a prophet. Typically, they are scruffy, ill-kempt, and wild-eyed. They speak harsh truths no one wants to hear. They shake things up. People hope they'll just go away.
The question of whether a prophet is right- is a different one. But no one can deny the effect of a prophet on his community. We're rms's community and the truth is he doesn't get a lot of respect here.
Why? I've heard some say it's because of his "pedantic semantics" and "politcal baggage". Well, I can't disagree with them. Specifically the issue of his calling Linux, GNU/Linux (and in the emacs configure script: lignux) lost rms a lot of political capital. The Linux community didn't want to hear him tell them that all their wonderful work (and it was wonderful. even back in '96 or so when this issue first came up) was dependent on the efforts of him and the FSF. And that they wanted credit.
The disagreement on Open Source and Free Software was similar. Pragmatists liked open source as it is easier to explain, and not so scarey to the proprietary companies who they wanted on-board. rms' politics and insistence on freedom as the essence of free software is scarey. cf. my bit on prophets. :) But to give him credit, that brand of anarchist
radicalism is important- I don't think Linux would have happened the way
it has if it wasn't rms' inspirational message.
Hmmm. This rant has turned into apoligism for rms. And rms needs no apologies. He's given us a lot. Probably, more than we'd like, or feel comfortable with.
Although I personally am a tremendous advocate for free software (and even open source), I can't endorse rms' beliefs that proprietary software is by its nature immoral. I think it has a lot of disadvantages. I think free software is better for user's b/c they have a choice about how it gets developed. I think its better for developers b/c it gives us a common store of accumulated wisdom and solutions on which to build new software. But I won't say that proprietary software is evil and those who write it are at best dupes. I feel like people pay the rent however they can, and it is still much easier to do that writing closed source software. Will it be true in the future? Maybe. I don't know. But I'm not going to make it into a moral judgement.
I didn't vote on the Gnome Foundation's board. I don't follow gnome's development really, so I didn't think it was right to involve myself. Would I have voted for rms? I don't know. As I've probably made clear, I admire the man and his work. He was an important factor in starting the Gnome project at its beginning. On the other hand, I think developments like the (purported) adaption of Gnome by Sun for Solaris could be very important to its future. rms probably doesn't like it. so, perhaps his losing is the right thing to have happened for gnome's future.
but I think its not right to celebrate his loss. certainly not to label him as a fool or a dinosaur as I've seen some linux-ites do. not only is it ungrateful, but it's foolish to label your fore-fathers as fools. What does that say about those who've followed in his tracks?
cheers, jem.
--
Global Village Idiot
Email: jem@sunsite^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hmetalab^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hibi
Truely an american icon