Re: Do We Need a New Evangelist?
On 29 Mar 1999 bruce@perens.com wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Since Eric Raymond has expressed a desire to retire as Open Source evangelist,
> I've written an article "Do We Need a New Evangelist?" discussing how he should
> be replaced. It's at http://perens.com/Articles/Evangelist.html .
>
> Thanks
>
> Bruce Perens
>
Hi, Bruce.
I read the above article and agree with it. Eric took a lot of flak after
"Refund Day" here in Silicon Valley too. Maybe it is just too much for a
single person to do. I like your idea of a "Free Software Ambassador
Corps". One thing that is very difficult is to please a large community.
No matter WHAT you say, someone is going to disagree with it. After a
while of being the primary speaker, I can understand where one might get
tired of the criticism all the time.
On the other hand, why is it so bloody important to have "official
representatives"? Why is it so important to instruct the coprorate world
or the major media on how this community operates? How does that benefit
the free software community? On an emotional level it is NICE to be
popular and have all this notice from the mainstream media but is it
really all that important from a technical standpoint? Would GNU get more
done if Richard would just shut up and code? How much energy is wasted on
political discussions that do not produce a single line of code or improve
any existing product?
What if a CNN asked for an interview for a major story and were told to
buzz off. Would that actually damage the project? It certainly will not
affect the revenue stream. Tell one of their own people to get involved,
then write about it. I am sure they have a gazillion backroom hackers
that write/maintain CNN's software. Heck, maybe CNN could even sponsor a
project, bet they have an old server and some bandwidth to spare. THEN let
them write about how much fun it is to PARTICIPATE.
Why do we even need spokespeople, why does the world need to understand
us?
Reply to: