Question for TLUGgers: How can Canada take a leading role in FOSS?

[Jamon Camisso]

Christopher Browne wrote:
> On 4/3/06, Jamon Camisso <jamon.camisso-H217xnMUJC0sA/PxXw9srA at public.gmane.org> wrote:
>> Christopher Browne wrote:
>>> An attempt to found a Canadian FSF would founder almost certainly as
>>> there isn't anyone with a comparable level of monomania that would be
>>> the clear authority.  Regionalism would further fragment this, as
>>> there is no satisfactory place to found the organization.  Why
>>> shouldn't someone in Calgary start another foundation that represents
>>> them?  Ditto for Montreal.
>> Perhaps the foundational approach is not the way to go then. Perhaps
>> treating Linux as a product like any other, marketing it as such to
>> consumers/businesses would be the better approach. Anything tinged with
>> ideology (whatever that is) or political rhetoric automatically tunes
>> people out -- but products, not so much. As users, developers, and
>> advocates, we should in the marketing business, not in the now well
>> established technical support business, or political arena (more on this
>> in a moment). Not that there isn't a place for either, just that at the
>> moment I'd say (and am for that matter) that energy should be directed
>> at getting people to take notice outside of the aforementioned areas.
> 
> ideology is a given in this case.
> 
> The only way to avoid political rhetoric is to continually declare the
> basic political principles, all the time.
> 
>>>> We have, on this list, some of the smartest people anywhere. It would
>>>> be a shame if we couldn't harness that group intelligence to do some
>>>> good for our society.
>> Intelligence or cleverness, which is more important to convincing
>> someone to consider Linux? For that matter, just getting people to
>> understand *what* Linux is would be a huge task but would probably do
>> more good than any amount of politicking or mega/monomaniacal ravings or
>> vision.
>>
>>> The trouble is that politics is HARD...
>> And essentially meaningless empty rhetoric directed at making it appear
>> that governments are engaged in something other than hiding the fact
>> that they are trying to hide from the public who originally gave them
>> their mandate. Politics is not the avenue *yet*. Someday it will be, but
>> right now, people don't even know what Linux is. They've heard the name
>> for sure -- there is a huge amount of curiosity out there -- it's just a
>> matter of getting people's attention *without* resorting to politics.
> 
> You're missing the point.

I think that the reverse is true. I suppose I'm guilty of not defining 
the word in an extremely measured and specific manner; indeed, I don't 
define it at all, but you are relying on a totally different conception 
of politics that the one to which I refer in a clear and referential 
enough manner. See below.

> Any time more than one person gets together, there's politics.
> 
> Figuring out that you can start talking when I stop talking, or vice
> versa, is a policy, and hence politics.
> 
> When a group of people get together, and you have to figure out a way
> to have someone speak next in an organized manner, THAT'S POLITICS.
> 
> If you try to "avoid resorting to politics," then that's a simple
> evasion of the simple truth, that any time people get together,
> "politics happens."  Pretending the irrelevance of that is as sure a
> route to failure as exists.

How then does a company like Apple or Microsoft successfully market a 
product? When was the last time a marketing campaign launched by either 
of the two companies relied on being openly political? When was the last 
time that you saw a television or magazine ad that highlighted the 
"political" dynamics of the development or marketing teams? Your 
definition of politics doesn't change the fact that marketing a product 
is far easier if there is no tinge of the "political" involved. Of 
course, it's not impossible, but on the whole, and in the most general 
sense I can possibly muster in these few words, I pronounce it to be 
extremely difficult or unlikely to be successful. That being said, I can 
imagine those few successes would be of most magnificent proportions.

Jamon
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml