Robert Bushman wrote: > > On Sat, 27 Jul 2002, George Toft wrote: > > > I have overhauled my Linux site, and would appreciate a technical review > > of the material presented. > > > > http://georgetoft.com/linux > > Very nice upgrade. The switch to breaking the pages down > by subtopic (I think this is new?) is a definite improvement > to usability. Yeah, that's been bugging me for a while . . . > In particular, I focused on the Linux Advocacy Tenets > section. If 50% of the radicals on Slashdot would put > even 50% of your ideas into action, it would be a much > more useful forum. I try to read them occasionall to refresh my outlook. As you all know, I am prone to slipping up at times. I suppose I need to go to therapy so I can work out my anger that I have for THAT company. You make some interesting points, I'll chew on them. George > There are a few on which I have a slightly different > perspective. Being an ornery and opinionated bastard, > I thought I'd take a moment to contrast :) > > "Let's accurately describe the capabilities of Linux and leave > it at that." > > I tend to contrast Linux with its primary competitor. > Now, I need to immediately stress that this does not > mean saying, "yeah, but Windows sucks!" Rather, it > means that saying, "Linux has a much better security > record than Windows," when the listener is likely > to be receptive to the information (IE: don't say > this to an MS rep at COMDEX) is fair and productive. > > Moreover, clearly Microsoft does not hesitate to > point out what they perceive to be the flaws in Linux. > This is not to say that we should necessarily stoop > to their level in all situations, but that in situations > where it is beneficial to the advocacy of Linux, we > should consider playing on an even field. > > "Always remember that if you insult or are disrespectful to someone, > their negative experience may be shared with many others. If you do offend > someone, please try to make amends." > > I'm not going to disagree with this. Rather, I thought > it was such an important point that I should repeat > it. Try never to forget that all people do what they > believe is right. Always. They just have a different > view of the world than you. Try to remember that you > are capable of mistakes and knowledge gaps as well. > And when you do forget - don't hesitate to apologize. > > "There will be cases where Linux is not the answer. Be the first to > recognize this and offer another solution." > > I would contest that as Linux advocates, we do not have > any duty to promote that which is not Linux. When you > go to a Ford dealership, do they say, "oh, a mid-sized > sedan? We're kind of weak in that area. Have you tried > Toyota?" Of course not. Likewise, as Linux advocates, > we are not responsible for showing the way to the > competition. I would propose that you present a different > image: "Linux has a solution for this problem, and I > can help you to make it work." If they ask about Windows > solutions, and you know that there is a superior > solution, simply say that you are not qualified to > express an opinion about Microsoft solutions. > > If the objective is (as the title suggests) Linux advocacy, > then your desire to show your skill with non-Linux solutions > is a non-issue. Forget credibility, noone believes in any > advocate's integrity anymore. The only extent to which, as > a Linux advocate, you should promote Windows is in those-- > extremely rare and difficult to recognize--situations where > supporting one Windows station today will lead to two Linux > stations tomorrow. Frankly, it's simply better to only > advocate that which you are advocating - the dynamics of > reverse psychology are too complicated. > > I completely agree with your views on how one should make > their point. I would propose that a more aggressive > position on what points to make could be more productive. > > ________________________________________________ > See http://PLUG.phoenix.az.us/navigator-mail.shtml if your mail doesn't post to the list quickly and you use Netscape to write mail. > > PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us > http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss