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
(text/plain)