Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Linux Today Founder Calls for Boycott of Linux Today

Posted by michael on from the doh dept.

dave writes "I founded and managed Linux Today in 1998, bringing it up from nothing into the most powerful and large Linux news website in the world, in less than a year. I am now calling on the Linux community to boycott my creation until its current owners stop accepting money from Microsoft to publish blatantly anti-Linux/pro-Microsoft ads."

7 of 744 comments (clear)

  1. Ads on Slashdot by ziondreams · · Score: 5, Interesting


    I was shocked to find the very same ads mentioned in the article on this site a while back. I've always thought of /. as a very pro-linux community...let alone the OSDN, who, I'm assuming serves the ads.

    --
    01000001 01011001 01000010 01000001 01000010 01010100 01010101
    1. Re:Ads on Slashdot by steve_l · · Score: 5, Interesting

      What irritates me is when amazon do it. On my own book. There is a sponsored link on my book pointing people at the TCO comparisons -the one we know were so unbiased.

      Can I get the links taken down? nope, they pay, they get. All I can do is make sure the next edition has no support for Windows whatsoever.

    2. Re:Ads on Slashdot by Sean80 · · Score: 5, Interesting
      You could not physically be more wrong. Recently, one of the larger television stations refused to air one of MoveOn.orgs advertisements. Political reasons. As we all know, Disney also refused to distribute Fahrenheit 9/11. The list could go on and on. One person's FUD is another person's truth. You can't like free speech when it works for you, and hate it when it doesn't. It's as simple as that. Who decides what's truth here? You? What if Microsoft is actually right? And if you think that's anything other than a rhetorical question, you've missed the point entirely.

      No, you don't have to be silent about your disagreeing with one person's representation of the truth, but asking an entire community to boycott a website due to the advertisements which it runs is a dangerous, dangerous slide into the sort of polarity we see in the United States today.

    3. Re:Ads on Slashdot by thakadu · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Yes, two different, and perfectly valid opinions. It always seems unfair when one side appears to be more honest than the other (at least to me) and the honest side then loses the race. A friend recently commented that conservatives are always going to win because they have perfected the art of non-accountability. I think he was referring to the party designated as R on C-span but this could equally apply to dishonest ad sponsors.

  2. If Microsoft wants to fund a Linux magazine... by squiggleslash · · Score: 5, Interesting
    ...then more fool them. As long as "Linux Today" does not allow advertisers to interfere with its content, either directly or indirectly, I don't see an issue.

    I read nothing in the complaint to suggest that Linux Today's content has been compromised by these adverts. Instead, the entire complaint seems to be purely that Microsoft advertises, and the advertising itself is Linux-hostile.

    That's fine. And I expect most readers will ignore what Microsoft has to say, but be delighted they're funding Linux.

    --
    You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  3. Re:Boycott? by BeBoxer · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Agreed. I think it's great that Microsoft likes to support pro-Linux magazines and web sites. Everytime I see one I chuckle to myself. "Suckers. No one here is going to be swayed by your ad, but thanks for spending the money anyway!" If anything, Microsoft's need to advertise in Linux channels helps legitimize Linux (as though that hasn't already been done.)

  4. Money's flowing in the right direction by pz · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Way back in the 90s, my brother banded together a bunch of his friends to start a company and put up a web site. It eventually became one of the leaders in it's field with millions of hits per day (it's a sports site that is now run by one of the big television networks). My brother's a big proponent of open source, he's got an ultra-low Slashdot ID (less than 100), the web sites he's built have all been done under Linux and Perl, and has contributed to various open source projects pretty extensively (eg, xemacs, mysql). When the web site was just big enough to attract advertising, they made a $2000 booking from Microsoft, and I admonished him for doing business with the devil. He replied, "yeah, but the money's flowing in the right direction."

    Who among us wouldn't rather money flow from Microsoft rather than to them, especially when the recipient is an open-source advocate?

    --

    Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.