DRAFT FAQ: Free vs. Open

[Tzeng, Nigel H.]

>Rick Moen [mailto:rick at linuxmafia.com]
>Quoting Tzeng, Nigel H. (Nigel.Tzeng at jhuapl.edu):

>> Perhaps OSI's neutral stance on proprietary software is born from
>> pragmatism but it does allow the OSI to be inclusive rather than
>> exclusive.

>What "neutral stance on proprietary software"?  Sorry, I think this
>assertion is quite blatantly, so to speak, used cow food.
 
 
Fine, if you don't like neutral, how about not "openly hostile" to the point 
where closed source software is described as "unethical".
 
If the position of the OSI that closed source software is "evil" please let 
me know.


> A consistent agenda of advocating open source over proprietary software
> and explaining to the broader world its advantages does not constitute
> a "neutral stance on proprietary software".


You can promote your own advantages without the need to demonize 
the opposition.  You can advocate open source while maintaining a
neutral (or even positive) position on the value of closed cource.
 
In other words, there is no need to polarize a discussion on software 
development methodologies or how one makes a living doing so.  For 
example, just because I might think there are advantages to Java doesn't 
mean I go around saying that coders using C# are unethical.   I can be 
neutral about C# despite thinking that Java is the superior solution.

I can even think that C# is really cool while thinking Java is even cooler.

Computers are binary.  Humans are not.


> So, sorry, wrong.  Try again.


Are you trying to pick a fight?  If so, why? 
 
Nigel

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20080110/50e1b02d/attachment.html>