Re: Anarchy! Yes, Anarchy!
On Thu, 21 Aug 1997 22:14:05 -0700 (PDT), George Bonser wrote:
>On Thu, 21 Aug 1997, Mike Schmitz wrote:
>
>> myself in alignment with David Cinege and Paul Wade. I do not think that
>> _any_ decision should be made on business, marketing, or political reasons,
>> Whatever the cost, ONLY quality of the code and distribution should be
>> considered. I believe that only harm can come from asking any government's
>> sanction of the project, and money can only corrupt it. I apologize if my
>> opinion is not shared by the majority, but it is mine, and all are free to
>> disagree.
>>
>
>Oh, horsehockey. Bandwidth does not grow on trees. Neither do systems.
>It is impossible to plant a seed and grow a system, it takes money. If
>you can show that you are a non-profit organization, it provides incentive
>for people to assist your project IF they find it worthy of their support.
That's not a universal concensus. To me it's a turn off.
>A financial break for a community to help itself is not a bad idea. I
>suspect you are more than a little paranoid. Anarchy only works when all
>parties think exactly alike which is oxymoronic to the term.
That's foolish. Anarchy does work, because no man is ever given the upper hand in
a conflict soley by his position.
I'm not a socialist....I've owned my own (non-corporate) business for over 8 years.
I know what expenses are, about marketing, and about making money, and I have
made money using Debian. I'd be a hipocrit if I said other people could not...except
for this creature we call Debian.
When I first started playing with deb, Debian was an idea. It was a bunch of files
from a bunch of people, that made using linux better. The distribution existed by the
sheer will of the people who built it. The ethic was that all work was done for free
and released under GNU.
A donation to 'debian' meant supporting the deveopers directly in some way,
offering bandwidth, and contributing to the project. There were no direct bills to pay.
The project could never fold unless the developers decided to just walk away.
Then Debian suddenly had to get orginized, and become 'something'. It's now a
company. It now wants money. It now has expensives. It now determines what is
and is not 'official'. I don't like it. It was fine the way it was before.
>Sure, you can DREAM that such a system can flourish without money but if
>it becomes large enough (which Debian has), it starts to require real
>resources that only money can buy. Sure, you might be able to get the
>telephone company to donate a T1 ... if they can deduct it.
Are you high?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.psychosis.com/emc/ Elite MicroComputers 908-541-4214
http://www.psychosis.com/linux-router/ Linux Router Project
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-user-request@lists.debian.org .
Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
Reply to: