Should Linux Users Lead From The Heart?
,----[ Quote ]
| If there's something to be gleaned about operating-system evangelism from all
| this (and I use that word deservedly), it's that the best way to get people
| to switch to Linux may be through something they can get wrapped up in, not
| just an argument.
`----
http://www.informationweek.com/blog/main/archives/2007/09/should_linux_us.html
Advocate Young Man/Woman, Advocate!
,----[ Quote ]
| These activities are of supreme importance for Free and Open Source Software
| (FOSS) in medicine to succeed. If FOSS advocates are not present or do not
| speak up at the table when decisions are being made, guess what direction the
| decisions will go? The power of advocacy works only when exercised.
`----
http://www.linuxmednews.com/1188917369
Related:
http://antitrust.slated.org/www.iowaconsumercase.org/011607/3000/PX03096.pdf
“There’s an interesting article in the April 2007 issue of Harper’s magazine
about panels, audits, and experts. It is called CTRL-ALT-DECEIT and is from
evidence in Comes v. Microsoft, a class action suit in Iowa. Here’s a
paragraph from a document admitted into evidence, called “Generalized
Evangelism Timeline,” about guerrilla or evangelical marketing:
Working behind the scenes to orchestrate “independent” praise of our technology
is a key evangelism function. “Independent” analysts’ reports should be
issued, praising your technology and damning the competitors (or ignoring
them). “Independent consultants should write articles, give conference
presentations, moderate stacked panels on our behalf, and set themselves up as
experts in the new technology, available for just $200/hour. “Independent”
academic sources should be cultivated and quoted (and granted research money).
They advise cultivating “experts” early and recommending that they not publish
anything pro-Microsoft, so that they can be viewed as “independent” later on,
when they’re needed. This type of evangelical or guerilla marketing is
apparently quite common in the high-tech fields, and seems to be used
liberally by open source developers.
The document admitted into evidence also says, “The key to stacking a panel is
being able to choose the moderator,” and explains how to find “pliable”
moderators–those who will sell out.
It is all a big money game. Most activists in any field know of
countless “hearings,” in which hundreds of citizens would testify before a
panel, only to be ignored in favor of two or three industry “experts.” When a
panel is chosen, the outcome seems to be a foregone conclusion. As with
elections, they don’t leave anything to chance.”
(a post from a Mark E. Smith about exhibit PX03096 “Evangelism is War” from
Comes v. Microsoft).
|
|
