[Consortium] Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: linuxaudio.org
andrea.glorioso at agnula.org
Wed Jan 21 17:27:49 EST 2004
Dave Robillard <drobilla at connect.carleton.ca> writes:
> On Wed, 2004-01-21 at 13:54, Andrea Glorioso wrote:
>> Dave Robillard <drobilla at connect.carleton.ca> writes:
>> > ? Grow up. I mentioned a concern about the list being closed and
>> > all of a sudden I'm being flamed and made fun of? (The first thing
>> > I ever said in this discussion I might add) Maybe if you're trying
>> > to 'represent' people you should adopt a mannerism not
>> > characteristic of 14-year-old script kiddies.
>> Sigh. I guess next time I'll have to add a longer disclaimer. For
>> the record, I didn't mean to take fun on you. I was trying (albeit
>> with poor results) to have some fun together (maybe <auto-ironic> is a
>> better tag, I don't know).
> 'Apology' accepted, and sorry for getting offended, but I'm sure you can
> understand - I voiced a concern, and essentially was lumped in with the
> slashdot "Micro$loth sux0rz" crowd.
I guess the real problem was that non-native speakers should never try
to be ironic or in any case try to bend a foreign language beside its
basic rules. Irony is difficult enough to express and understand in
one's own language.
> Anyway, I think the general lesson to be learned here (for everyone I
> mean) is to tread carefully and mind /everyone's/ opinions and
> concerns. Not all of us are simply mindbent on linux world domination
> (and some of us are).
I am (but I aim at Libre Software world domination, Linux is just a
very useful technical tool to do the trick for now).
> Some people take this whole freedom thing very seriously, and get
> mighty defensive when it's threatened. That is the whole point of
> our little operating system here, after all..
If you look at the consortium-p archives you'll see that I perfectly
agree. Actually, some of my positions were discussed and rejected
because they were too extreme (and as such difficult to implement) in
this regards. I had no problems with it, because as all things in
life you learn to do compromises if you think the goal is worth it.
And in the end you always have the option to opt out (or not to join
Just to say that obviously the consortium is not entirely made up of
corporate "wolves" who don't know or don't care about freedom
(honestly I don't see how one could reach this conclusion looking at
the current members' list, but anyway).
And of course, that doesn't mean I want or I can represent anybody but
myself and the project I currently manage.
More information about the Consortium