Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Optimizing Linux Advocacy Efforts

Posted by michael on from the million-penguin-march dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Open source advocate Tony Stanco, of the George Washington University Cyberspace Policy Institute has been getting flamed for allowing Microsoft reps to speak at an Open Source in government conference he's putting on next month. Today, in a commentary on NewsForge, Tony responds to the flamers. He says, "Leave it to the kooks in the community to make Microsoft look sympathetic." Is he right? Should we be willing to listen to what Microsoft has to say? Aren't open minds important to open source?" Newsforge and Slashdot are both part of OSDN.

7 of 320 comments (clear)

  1. Good point by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Microsoft isn't the only one hurting open source. Many of the elitists do just a good of a job at giving opensource a bad name.

    1. Re:Good point by wastaz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Exactly, and disallowing the opposing side to speak is a very good way at showing elitism. I guess one of the sides has to show that it is the better side that listens to what the other side says...let's make sure that MS isnt the side that does so first ^_^

      Oh, and I'm praying to god that there'll be a webcast of this. I havent had as fun as when I listened to the MS representative debating with the mySQL founder on Stockholm challenge in months. Damn that poor MS rep was funny, thought I'd laugh myself to death when he began talking about how lousy the support is for opensource software and how fast MS fixes bugs.

    2. Re:Good point by Anonvmous+Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "Exactly, and disallowing the opposing side to speak is a very good way at showing elitism."

      This comment struck a chord with me. One of the things I cannot stand about the way articles are posted on Slashdot is that every chance is taken to put MS in the worst possible light. I'll give you an example, last year there was an article titled "Microsoft throws Sony out of CES". Sort of implies that MS bullied Sony out, right? The content of the story that Slashdot linked to clarified what really happened: Sony broke a rule at a tradeshow, MS turned them in to the people that run the show, Sony threw a temper tantrum and left. MS didn't throw anybody out of anything. The worst thing they did was they made a legitimate complaint. But the way Slashdot spun it, MS was somehow using it's monopoly muscle to make the XBOX more visible.

      I have a question for you all: If Slashdot hates every move MS makes, how can any of us be taken seriously about our legitimate complaints about them?

      Getting onto the topic at hand, I just wanted to make the point that the Linux Advocates need to show more objectivity. They cannot be taken seriously if they show similar attitudes that the visible Slashdot community has. They need to be able to acknowledge when MS has a strength or a point.

      If (EverythingMS) == BAD then AdvocateCredibility == FALSE.

      Be objective. Linux's merits will stand out. Just don't sound like a zealot.

  2. Be fair. by grub · · Score: 5, Funny

    Really.. the MS people know they're speaking to a tough house at events like this. Let them fall by their own devices..

    MS Rep: We have Clippy.

    OS Rep: We don't. We have robust, low cost software that in many cases outperforms proprietary software. We'll even give you the source code to modify the products for your own use. If you don't distribute the binaries, feel free to keep the source in-house.

    MS Rep: We have Clippy.

    --
    Trolling is a art,
  3. Something more importent then open source... by i.r.id10t · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... is open formats. If the Govn't decides that MS Word is their choice of word processors, so be it. But as a citizen of that Govn't, I should be able to use whatever software I want to view those documents - so either the .doc format needs to be open enough for OpenOffice.org to code to it, or the Govn't needs to use things like Rich Text or PDF files or whatever I can open using *my* choice of software.

    --
    Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
  4. As long as they have something to contribute... by JeremyR · · Score: 5, Interesting
    From the conference's Web site:
    This conference is designed to discuss best practices, raise awareness and the share experiences among policy makers from the U.S. and Europe.
    To the extent that Microsoft can contribute to the discussion of best practices, raising of awareness, etc. pertaining to open source, I don't see why they should be barred from participation. In fact I think their very presence may indirectly contribute to raising of awareness.

    Cheers,
    Jeremy

  5. The real issue by Milo+Fungus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    From the article:

    What the loons on the extreme of the extreme don't understand is that Microsoft would love to have an excuse to not attend. Microsoft is not coming because it wants to. It is coming because it is compelled to.

    It's Microsoft's government customers who want them there to explain themselves in public when they say that Shared Source is better than Open Source, instead of just talking that way in private. And it is the government that wants them to do it in front of Open Source supporters, so that they can hear both sides at the same time.

    This sounds like a good idea. It forces them to state their views rather clearly in a discussion forum. What better way is there to scrutinize the issue than to hear both sides from the horses' mouths? If their "shared source is as good as open source" shpeal is just a bunch of rubbish then their arguements won't hold water. I'd be very interested to hear a compelling argument in their favor. Evaluating counter-arguments is a great way to formulate and solidify your opinion.