The Spotlight is a Harsh Mistress
from the take-the-bad-with-the-good dept.
If you didn't read (or don't feel like going to) the story linked to above about Bruce's little foot-in-mouth moment, I'll summarize it for you: After getting (IMO justifiably) frustrated over some terms in the license for Corel's new Debian-based Linux distribution and Corel's refusal to change them, Bruce posted a little note on the debian-legal discussion list that said, in part, "It's time for us to bring suit against Corel for this 'can't download unless you're 18' stuff. That's not in our license and they know it."
Almost immediately, a Slashdot reader submitted Bruce's comment to us, and Hemos ran it as a story as soon as he checked to make sure that yes, Bruce had really written that comment. The Slashdot story got over 300 remarks added to it within two hours of its initial appearance, many of which said that Bruce had over-reacted to Corel's licensing intransigence, and many more which lambasted Slashdot generally, and Hemos personally, for having posted a "private" message on Slashdot without getting Bruce's permission in advance.
Bruce was an active participant in the Slashdot discussion that followed Hemos's post and, in the end, backed down his original "we oughta sue" statement. Hemos apologized for the post. And the comments kept on coming, because that's the nature of Slashdot.
There was also some e-mail exchanged between Bruce, CmdrTaco, Hemos, and myself. It was not vituperative. We all like and respect each other. Bruce has my home phone number, and I have his (somewhere). But that e-mail exchange led to this article, because this entire incident, and the way it got blown out of proportion, is a prime example of changes in the nature of online discussion, Open Source development, and Slashdot's role in it all.
Coincidentally - it had been scheduled to run for over a week - yesterday we had an Ask Slashdot piece about the demise of old-fashioned, local dialup Bulletin Boards. There was a lot of nostalgia expressed for the days when your "online community" was 20 or 30 people who all lived near you, and you could all get together now and then for a soda or a beer or whatever. There were no Anonymous Cowards in that kind of environment. Sure, people used screen names like "BBBopper," but if you were a member of the community, you knew that BBBopper's real name was "Bernard," where he lived, and where he worked.
I miss those days, and I'm sure Bruce does too. You could say damn near anything on your freewheeling local BBS, and if you *really* put your foot in your mouth you could either delete your comment or ask your friendly sysop to delete it for you. But it didn't really matter. The chances of a vituperative neighbor or a reporter for the local newspaper reading your post were virtually nil, and even if they were reading, so what? Back then, hardly anyone paid attention to the few weirdos who spent their nights dialing into each others computers.
Fast-forward to now: there are days when Slashdot does well over one million pageviews. Reporters from The Wall Street Journal (Hi Lee!), CNN (Hi, Ian!) and even Al Gore campaign staffers (Hi, Ben!), read Slashdot regularly. Stories that break here are often picked up by general-interest media or serve as inspiration (we say politely) for their own reporting. And Slashdot readers obviously subscribe to discussions like debian-legal, so the distance between a hasty mailing list post and the front page of a national newspaper can be as little as two clicks.
Calling your favorite mailing list "private" or "obscure" does not make it so. If any idiot who has a valid e-mail address can subscribe to it, it is not private. As for obscurity, that depends on the poster. An offhand comment made by Al Average is unlikely to make it into either Slashdot or the Wall Street Journal no matter where it originally appears. A comment by Bruce Perens or Richard M. Stallman or Steve Ballmer or Linus Torvalds or Larry Ellison or anyone else perceived to have "weight" in software development matters is another story. These people are celebrities, at least to Slashdot readers, so their words are going to be taken seriously, analyzed, and quoted, requoted, and even possibly misquoted as heavily as news of Cher's latest love affair will be discussed in the movie gossip tabloids.
In this "celebrity" context, there are two main differences between Bruce Perens and Cher:
- 1 - At least one billion people have heard of Cher, while only a few million (at most) have ever heard of Bruce Perens.
- 2 - Bruce Perens is more important than Cher, especially to Slashdot readers.
A better comparison than Bruce:Cher is Bruce:Alan Greenspan. If Alan Greenspan goes out to eat and tips a waiter 20% and makes a lame (but overheard) joke about waiters demanding higher tips because of the booming economy, two dozen financial pundits will immediately try to figure out if Greenspan is planning to raise interest rates, and the stock market is sure to blip one way or another in response to the "news" of Greenspan's "statement."
Like it or not, if Alan Greenspan makes his remark in a public place it is fair media game. As long as he is quoted accurately, there is nothing he can do about the appearance of his offhand sentence in newspapers and as discussion fodder on talking-head TV shows. Bruce Perens is nowhere near as influential as Alan Greenspan, but within the confines of the Open Source/free software community, his words may have more impact on investment behavior and are, therefore, more important to Slashdot readers who hold shares in Red Hat and other companies that live and die by Open Source software.
I growled a little at Hemos for later adding a "Maybe I shouldn't have posted it" apology to his piece about Bruce's comment. It was an amicable growl; we work together as a tight team around here, and we all accept the fact that each Slashdot author and editor is an individual with his own point of view. But I don't (personally) believe we should ever apologize for running legitimate news, including speculations made in public forums by Open Source celebrities. And Bruce Perens is not only a legitimate public figure in the Open Source context, but is one largely because of his own actions. Bruce is not a reticent person. He has requested Slashdot coverage of his pet projects many times, and often as not he's gotten it. This time, he got coverage when he neither requested nor desired it, and was unhappy at the kind of attention focused on him.
I called this little essay "The Spotlight is a Harsh Mistress" because (RAH reference aside) this statement sums up my main point here: that once you open a press floodgate everything passes through it, not just what you want. And the piece I wrote earlier this week about Open Source and free software developers becoming more like stage performers than reclusive poets was as much of a cautionary tale as anything else. Yes, there are adoring Open Source fans out there, but those fans are as fickle -- and demanding -- as any other kind of fans, and when you have the combination of celebrities and devout fans, paparazzi lurking in the bushes are almost inevitable.
Slashdot is not exactly in the paparazzi category (I like to think) but we are certainly a prime source not only of Open Source and free software development news, but also of community gossip. What "we" post officially is far less than 10% of the site's total content. The rest is uncensored remarks by readers. While you can choose to only read posts other readers (moderators) decide are worthwhile, you always have the option of reading Slashdot in all of its fierce, chaotic glory simply by setting your threshold to -1. (Our boss, CmdrTaco, absolutely insists on this "no censorship ever" policy and we all back him up fiercely on this one!)
Even if you are not logged in as a registered member, you can set the moderation threshold on each individual article as you read it. My personal Slashdot reading preference is a setting of -1, with comments nested instead of threaded. And, believe it or not, I read almost every comment attached to almost every Slashdot article almost every day. There are suprising gems (and some great humor) buried in the mass if you take the trouble to look for them.
Is Slashdot going downhill? Probably, in some ways. It's not the cozy little Web site I discovered several years ago, when it was new and crude and 30 comments on an article was big-time. But by that same standard both the Internet and Usenet have been going downhill almost since day one. First the original Unix heavies grumbled about letting the non-CS (but still research) people in. Then all the researchers grumbled about letting the students in, and how they polluted discussion groups with trivial conversation and dirty jokes and filled up mail servers with stupid chain letters. Then the unwashed mass of Prodigy people hit, over one million strong, and irritated everyone who was already on the Internet, and then they complained about all the "clueless AOLers" who followed them.
But newbies don't stay newbies forever, either on the Internet in general or here on Slashdot. Two or three years from now, I assure you, some of the same AC kiddies who are now going "Whoo! First Post!" will become settled members of "the community" and will grumble about the next Slashdot newbie generation's silly games, whatever they turn out to be.
And two or three years from now Bruce Perens will be a dignified Elder Statesman of the burgeoning, ever-growing Open Source and free software community, and he will be aghast at some of the things that less media-worn people say in forums they considered private but really weren't, and the whole circle will continue to grow, with new, fresh faces always coming on board -- and some of the old ones departing for one reason or another.
Perhaps, too, we'll see the advent of more "members only" forums with strict privacy restrictions, somewhat like the old private BBS operations, and those will be where "online celebrities" hang out and let down their hair with one another, just as some film celebs only feel comfortable at private parties guarded by thuglike doormen who keep out anyone who isn't on a tightly-controlled guest list.
But I would personally rather see total openness, here on Slashdot and in as many other places as possible. Sure, mistakes will be made. You'll make some, Bruce Perens will make some, and I'm sure I'll make (more than) my fair share as well. To me, this is the point of Slashdot; to level the playing field and treat all comers exactly the same, on both their good days and their bad days; to provide a well-lit, well-known "space" where both silly and serious debates can take place, opinions can be aired and debunked, and even (once in a while) a mind or two can be changed.
Some boards... (Score:2)
Don't try to explin this away! (Score:2)
This issue has nothing to do with the medium on which we speek.
This has everything to do with honesty in any relationship . . . .on-line or off.
This isn't 'the end' - it's just reality. (Score:2)
Personally I wish this wasn't so - that people wouldn't freak out when someone expresses an opinion. Unfortunately the sad fact is that human nature may automatically qualify someone that is a leader is right. This is not always the case, and people do not need to get as passionate about what someone else thinks or says. As I read in an earlier story "The first amendment has never been a popular one" -- which is true but thank goodness that we have it, or at least for the most part.
Censoring the bulk of what someone says is not the way slashdot should run, not with a members area or anything along these lines. Here's a good idea - before posting the story (if it is about someone) verify that the information is correct. This may add an extra check for
Cher Vs. Bruce Perens (Score:3)
Bruce Has millions of bits running on computer systems worldwide.
Cher Is intstantly recognizable with just one name.
Bruce Is intstantly recognizable with just one name.
Cher Has great legs.
Bruce Has great Karma.
Cher Has a lot of devoted fans.
Bruce Has a lot of devoted fans.
Cher Has her own PR people.
Bruce Could use his own PR people.
Celebrity and Fame (Score:2)
Despite the best attempts of media to convince the unwashed masses otherwise, there is a distinct difference between celebrity and fame. Part of it is to do with your time horizon and any distinctive or unique claim to a place in history. While most current pop stars or sports heroes will be forgotten in another decade or five, certain names (at least in the hacker sphere) will still be remembered (RS, Linus, ERS, etc) for changing the way we think and view the world. In a sense, fame is somewhat (initially) conversely opposite to popularity (ie raise a ruckus), where people (whether conciously or not) take a principled stand in their view and stick to their convictions. Unlike the standard 30 soundbites, your actions, words and deeds are recorded for prosperity in
Too bad none of the politicians have started a truth in media platform
LL
Re:This isn't 'the end' - it's just reality. (Score:2)
Don't trust everything you read ... (Score:5)
Back in the olde days, when you read something in a newspaper or a book you could be sure that it had been read by a few people before it ever got printed. So different newspapers etc. had different "trust levels", depending on their overall quality. But when you read something in a paper you never had heard of before, you were inclined to believe the story anyway. After all, there had to be editors-in-chief, etc. that would do at least some sanity checks.
That is different of course with stuff on the web, so the best way to avoid mistakes would be to trust nobody. But that's a bit paranoid, so you will try to figure out who you trust. And with sites like
But what about stuff on deja, or the homepage of some guy you don't know? You will probably try to judge from the appearance (just like you would try to classify your unknown paper), from the wording, etc. But you can be wrong, of course.
I have a page on my website that deals with artificial intelligence. It's just a collection of thoughts I had a while back, and I am not a researcher in that field (I am kinda, but
So I would say: Don't be too paranoid, but if you want to use information for something important, better find out how credible it is by checking other sources (and the "surrounding" pages). And don't post an email on slashdot that just arrived from a mailing list. You don't know what will come of it. On the other hand, if the guys at
The main problem (I think, and I haven't followed that other story) was the first few words. "It seems that Corel has made one mistake too many." --- that sounded like BP was already suing them.
Shit may "Happen", but Bruce cleaned the mess up. (Score:4)
That said, Bruce made a mistake. God knows, I've put my foot in my mouth often enough -- and usually when I'm pissed off -- so I feel plenty of sympathy for Bruce here. It's impossible to regularly post over the years and NOT say something stupid once in a while. Hasn't Linus overreacted in linux-kernel before? Let's not forget Eric Raymond with his Jedi Knight uniform at the Windows Refund day... I'm sure that went over well with the mass media journalists. And how about Bill Gate's video deposition... talk about tasting foot fungus.
It's normal for anyone who's in the spotlight to make the occasional mistake. Bruce recognized his error and apologized in public. Which is more than I can say for most who back themselves into an indefensible verbal corner.
Ugh. I thought this might be an -apology-. (Score:2)
The traditional media commits all sorts of terrible offenses. I don't think that using their actions as justification is such a good idea. How do you draw the line between publishing gossip about well-known public people and some of the most grievous offenses of the media (e.g. simply lying in stories)?
Re:Importance Comparison (Score:2)
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
So-called "lamers" (Score:4)
Twenty years from now, when the greybeards won't have any hair at all, and the "newbies" are running everything, it's fairly obvious that there will be more "newbies" to irritate the former newbies. Why? Well, for one, when someone new joins a community, they aren't quite sure of their place. They either feel awkward, or superior. Either way, they're likely to annoy those already present.
I suppose that my point is that, hopefully, we can all remember when *we* were irritating people with names like "S00p3rK00L" or what-have-you, and be tolerant. Also, I'm slightly disturbed by the "private party" reference towards the end: it's my hope that many Open Source "celebrities" aren't caught up in their own image, and will remain active in the community, rather than retreating to a reclusive social pool. For surely, without guidance, the circle is broken.
Re:Sounds of the geeks! (Score:2)
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
Guarded Comments (Score:3)
That said, I would like to express my hope that this uproar does not cause Bruce to retreat into the kind of measured mediaspeak that we get from every corporate flack in the world. Bruce is not an officer of Red Hat and owes nothing to their stockholders. Neither does he owe anything to the stockholders of the Open Source corporation, because there is no such thing, and hopefully never will be.
One of the greatest benefits of the Open Source community is the degree to which we can trust that statements made from its illuminaries come from the heart. Any deviation from this is a lessening of the community, and I for one hope that Bruce Perens recovers quickly from this fiasco and continues to fight the good fight.
Re:Hmm (Score:2)
important than BP. In fact, in most places other than the Open Source Community, BP isn't very important at all.
A valid point, but it might be good to consider this: which star is rising, and which star is falling?
Open Source has the potential to change the way we use the most impressive communications network ever invented. Yes, it seems trite to keep beating the drum of "it's the Internet, stupid". However, the rules are being changed. By us. Bruce Perens can advocate that Debian users go out and use MP3's and write free software to play it -- done already, although not as a mandate. Does Cher have to pay attention to this? As an artist, yes. Does Bruce have to give a rat's behind about which person Cher is dating right now? Who cares?
That record company executive is likely more interested in what new internet based technology (like MP3, or something else that Open Source might come up with) will be undercutting his business, than what Cher is up to. In that way, we, and BP by our designation, have more impact on his life than most of his artists do. Hmm, indeed.
And, O anonymous one, (Score:2)
Roblimo's the man (Score:3)
Rob, congratulations. I think you've really brought some great maturity and professionalism to Slashdot, at a time when it needed those qualities more than anything else. I remember seeing the first article you posted back when you were a brand new author, and I thought to myself, "Hmm. This guy's a real journalist. And garsh but he's OLD! I wonder how long CmdrTaco and the gang will be able to put up with him?".
Heh, of course, age brings wisdom, and it seems to me that you've been sort of a father figure at Slashdot. You seem to be the one who does the mop-up job after one of the younger, perhaps less mature or less wise, authors does something silly or something that raises a fuss. And you do the job well. I also seem to recall the Slashdot interview series beginning sometime just after you joined the team...I wonder how much you had to do with that? In any case, that also was an excellent addition to Slashdot's coolness.
Anyway, before all this praise gets out of hand, I'd just like to say great job, Roblimo, and keep up the good work. :)
--
Flawed Analysis (Score:4)
Things like this happen every day in countless thousands of publications world-wide. Somebody does something insignificant, and it is blown up into "news" by some editor. If it is not news, the public soon perceives this and issues a collective yawn.
Invariably, soon thereafter will follow an "editorial" piece, describing the situation as one which involved a struggle between social propriety (morals) and duty to the high calling of journalism. And regardless of the polarity of the decision (reporting something which maybe should not be, or failing to report something that maybe should be), the whole point is enroll the reader in the idea that journalism is a perilous path fraught with difficult decisions whose directions have unescapable consequences, and aren't we happy we have such dedicated people to take care of it all for us?
Well, spare us the editorial please. Spare us the lecture about the spotlight being a harsh mistess. It is not news. It is self-serving in a really loathesome way. It is an example of attributing significance where there is none. You are not Woodward and Bernstein. You are not Cronkite. Get back to doing what you started out to do - run a great web site. Spare us the self-importance.
I thank you, and the people of MeepZorp thank you.
======
"Rex unto my cleeb, and thou shalt have everlasting blort." - Zorp 3:16
Elder Statesperson (Score:2)
I bought Corel stock. I think Corel is critical to the success of the acceptance of Linux and Open Source. Other ISV's are watching. If Corel says "screw bruce, screw gnu, and screw linux", then we as a community or a revolution or an MS competitor will have a much harder time being accepted. Fortunately, the fact that Bruce was "slapped down" so quickly should be an encouraging sign to Corel and other companies that many in our community do see the importance of their involvement.
People in positions of popularity such as Bruce, cannot be expected to act differently than they normally do just because they are popular. I'm just glad the community and movement is strong enough to absorb missteps that occur. I think the true elder statespersons will be those who breed consensus in the community, those who continually provide improvements to the software, and those who provide advocacy, training, and forums for community. Whether Bruce will remain in enough of these catagories remains to be seen.
Beatles > Jesus | Perens > Cher (Score:2)
Re:Oh shut up ! (Score:2)
Ordinarily I would agree with this. However, even though I may not be of his opinion, I, and surely the people that run this place, would really like to hear it.
By offering commentary, even negative commentary, it adds to the "debatedness" of the site. I get extraordinarily upset when people are bashed for posting views "against the flow". Granted, I am not an advocate of "Y0u 5uck D0oD" posts, but at the same time, the post that started this thread is a valuable one.
While it would be very easy for him to ignore this article, and not make any commentary whatsoever, it is important that people know his opinion. Seriously, what if the majority share his opinion??? Certainly that should be taken into consideration the next time an article of this nature is being taken into consideration.
If there are items I don't feel I need to comment on, I don't, but there are very few circumstances in which I'd rather it weren't available, no matter how "stupid" or "idiotic".
To coin an ooooold phrase, "I may not like what you have to say, but I'd give my life for you to be able to say it." This is true even more in which the creators of the site ACTUALLY participate in its discussion, and its creations. Consider it feedback, consider it rights to one man's opinion, but don't consider it garbage.
Re:Oh shut up ! (Score:2)
i'll second this one.
Flamebait? FLAMEBAIT??? This, like its parent, is a perfectly reasonable contribution to the topic under discussion. There is no conceivable reason to label this as flamebait. Moderations like this are the reason I read at -1 and endure 45 second page load times.
======
"Rex unto my cleeb, and thou shalt have everlasting blort." - Zorp 3:16
Re:Guarded Comments (Score:3)
I think what set me off most today was the harsh judgement Bruce got for speaking his mind. The best way to avoid mistakes is to do and say nothing. The second-best way is to take the MS approach to code: keep your mistakes hidden.
Bruce Perens knew full well that I was writing this article, and I warned him that he might not agree with everything I was going to say in it. His two-letter comment: OK. He and I both believe that tolerance of another's errors is an important part of civil society, either online or in real life. "Let he (or she) who is without sin..." etc. etc.
I make my share of mistakes and freely admit it. I am proud to be associated with Slashdot, and I know full well that there is no way Slashdot will ever become as "smooth" as The New York Times. Indeed, if it ever does get that rigid, that's the day I'll be gone both as a staff person and as a reader. I regard Slashdot as a continuing media experiment, one that I have followed with extreme interest almost since day one, long before I hooked up professionally with Anodver.net. Slashdot is run by a team of openly fallible humans. Mistakes will be made. And given the nature of Slashdot's (fallible human) readership, every single real or imagined mistake made by anyone who posts anything here is going to be picked apart until nothing but bare bones are left.
I suppose (sigh) that I sometimes get a little extreme, especially about certain freedom-related issues. But, like Bruce, this happens because I am passionate about my beliefs and don't try to hide them.
Believe me, it's easier emotionally to qualify everything to death, politician-style, and try not to offend anyone, than it is to speak strongly from the heart and take some heat in return.
But I personally believe it is better to lay out your beliefs honestly and take the chance of screwing up in public than it is to hide under the covers, even though it is often more painful.
Now you have my $0.01 worth.
- Robin
Thick Skin (Score:2)
It's well known that you've got to have a set of asbestos underwear if you're going to post to slashdot, read slashdot, post a comment, or even practically THINK about slashdot.
When somebody puts their foot in their mouth, it's happened before, and they're going to get flamed. It happens, but those are "the rules of the game" so to speak, and you can't stop it, so just make sure you're wearing that asbestos when you do things in the first place. The debian list that Bruce posted to is of course public, and while it may not be as big as slashdot, I'm sure the same rules apply there as they do here.
I'm not criticising anybody but this story seems like old news. Yes, publicity is a cruel mistress, and you have to have thick skin. But that's ok, because obviously Bruce, Roblimo, and the rest DO have thick skin otherwise they wouldn't be here. A quote from Henry Rollins for those who are familiar with him: "If I took the time to bleed from all the tiny little arrows shot my way I wouldn't be here". That's true of anything in life in general, it just seems that as far as personality conflict is concerned, the net is life amplified. People lose their fear of offending others, and let it fly.
Bruce posted an apology, and as far as I'm concered, it's water under the bridge already. Even if he *hadn't* posted an apology, I'd think of it as his opinion (I haven't made my mind up about it yet) and move on. And when next week's story comes out and gets 300+ comments, the flamers will all move on.
Don't sweat the small stuff Bruce/Roblimo/CmdrTaco/Hemos.
Re:Hmm (Score:2)
The reason I post early (when possible) is so that my comments won't be lost in a mass of other comments. It has nothing to do with Karma -- I don't mind having my posts moderated up, because it makes them more visible, but I'm not doing it for the karma.
Still, you seem to think that my posts are worthless. That's fine. But realize that, if my posts are crap, it's not because I'm just spouting off garbage to get moderator points. It's because I'm a moron. I guess, once again, it's all a matter of point-of-view. Someone who agrees with me would probably see this point as interesting and reply with something on-topic.
Incidentally, I actually am 18 years old. I don't know if that really says anything about me as a person though. I'll bet a lot of /.ers are around my age. I have actually read some fairly interesting posts from people who I know to be 14. But this is all coming from an Anonymous Coward. It's impossible for anyone to track anything you say -- I find it in decidedly poor taste when ACs criticize logged-in members about their posting habits. There's nothing there to compare it to. Moreover, if you feel so strongly that everyone on Slashdot (with the notable exception of jd) is posting for the karma, then I don't see why you stick around. Unless you really like jd that much...
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
Coupla' Observations (Score:2)
And Slashdot readers obviously subscribe to discussions like debian-legal, so the distance between a hasty mailing list post and the front page of a national newspaper can be as little as two clicks.
This is both true and very neat. Not that I'm famous, but the same thing (kinda [wahcentral.net]) happened to me. The Internet makes control of digital media impossible, so things like this are bound to happen. As long as everything is sorted out in a reasonable time, what's the damage? There SO VERY MUCH information available, shouldn't it now be second nature to question everything you read, or at least wait for confirmation. I'm as guilty as the next party in jumping to rabid conclusions, that's emotion working, but before longterm opinions and biases set in I at least look for a confirming source.
That being said I would like to compliment slashdot on what I found yesterday. (check my homepage [slashdot.org]
if you don't understand) Get out your random string generators and you can have your precious small BBS done
enough.
Gateway responsibilities (Score:2)
As a site that sometimes claims to be of the journalistic variety there is a responsibility to ask yourself whether something should be posted or not. In many cases, what is posted on Slashdot a Real Journalist (tm) or Real Editor (tm) would have shunned posting it. A decent journalist would not run a story based on Greenspan's off the cuff commentary in a restaurant. If Bruce had planned to actually sue Corel (and I'm not saying it's a bad idea...) he would have made an official announcement. That would have been the time to actually cover the "story" -- Now Bruce and others like him know that unless they wish to be unduly scrutinized they can only communicate with the community via private email (time consuming), or only post non-controversial comments (self-censorship) or stay silent lest they be crucified for their opinions, whether they act on them or not. Hemos was correct, this should not have been posted in the first place. Kudos for doing the fact-checking, at least that's improving, but just because Bruce or one of the figureheads of the community makes a comment it doesn't make it fair game. True, under fair use law, it's legal to post one of Bruce's comments on a public mailing list, but that doesn't make it right.
Like the super heroes that most of us loved as kids, and probably still love now, Slashdot needs to learn that with great power comes great responsibility, and that means learning not to post everything that might be interesting until all of the facts are in. It's time to start behaving like a true news source, guys.
Re:Flawed Analysis (Score:3)
Really? Then... (Score:2)
It's wrong to make a news article out of something someone said on TV without consulting them first. Someone who speaks on TV is probably only intending to communicate with people tuned into that station. If you want to widely redistribute what they've said, you should check with them first. That's just courtesy for other people.
It's wrong to make a news article out of something someone said in a newspaper without consulting them first. Someone who writes for a magazine is probably only intending to communicate with people reading that newspaper. If you want to widely redistribute what they've said, you should check with them first. That's just courtesy for other people.
------
What? You don't realize that the Debian legal list is open to anyone with a valid e-mail address, just like a radio station's broadcast is open to anyone with a radio in recieving range?
Posting something to a publicly-accessable mailing list is not a private communication. It isn't even as private as shouting it out in the middle of the office Christmas party. Instead, it is as private as saying it on a radio call-in show, or in the op-ed page of your newspaper, or on public-access TV.
There's a humor element in this. (Score:5)
Bruce
I agree completely (Score:2)
My Opinion:
The person who submitted the story rushed things. Hemos posted it too quickly. (Sorry, buddy.)
Really, is the desire to get a scoop so intense that people are willing to run to the submit script every time someone says something controversial? I for one do not read Slashdot because it has the fastest news. Does anyone?
As for Roblimo's story, I'm a little saddened. It seems like he's shifting responsibility for this little ruckus onto Bruce. Okay, so maybe he sent that message prematurely, but he *didn't* send it to a million people like Slashdot did. Yes, it's hard to be in the spotlight, but it doesn't help when your friends are following you around with a 50,000 cp handheld deer-blinder.
There's a big difference. Suppose there's a nice little flameware on the kernel developer's list, or suppose Tom Christiansen lets someone have it on the Perl Porter's list -- does that really warrant a story that Linux or Perl is doomed? I'm willing to wait a day or two for confirmation of details before panicking. If I ran Slashdot, that would be the rule.
I don't, and it's just a suggestion. But I do hope Rob and Robin and Jeff and Justin and the rest sit down and decide if speed in reporting is more important than accuracy and insight, and then stick to that decision.
--
still better than most media outlets (Score:2)
Slashdot is still WAY better than most media outlets. What do you get from mainstream media, even those that normally cover tech-related issues? You get one opinion, filtered down and censored, so they don't offend anyone. On top of that most news sources cover tabloid topics nowdays, things that don't matter at all in the grand scheme of things.
On slashdot we have an unlimited number of opinions that I can learn something from (new ideas). Posters here actually know something about computers and tech in general, most posts are better than some journalist writing for a newspaper who likes to say "windows sucks, imacs are cool".
I really like the alternative viewpoints here as well. You're not going to find arguements against capitalism or the US on CBS evening news with Dan Rather. In addition to tech related stuff, we've got politics, economics, and social issues as well (or they at least come up in the posts).
Basically the positives outweigh the negatives: you still can't have everything. Slashdot might have a bit of a "tabloid" effect like mainstream media does, but it's not nearly as bad. The bottom line for me is that I'm exposed to more opinions, and I'm challenged to think by slashdot posts more than any mainstream story ever could.
Personally I hope all media evolves into a more "populist" form like slashdot someday.
Re:Bottome line...??? (Score:4)
But all of that aside, none of Red Hat, Netscape, Apple, IBM, ATT, etc. felt the need for that restriction. Corel just has this way of pissing the developers of their own system off every chance they get. They need to work on that.
Bruce
This FEATURE is GOOD. (Score:3)
I don't know that I agree that this story amplifies the damage-- on the contrary, I think it helps *dampen* the damage.
Look, you say "We all agree", but who is this "we"? THe casual ZeeDeeNet reporter browsing Slashdot who just saw "Bruce Parens says SUE COREL!" and then jumps off to write a story without clicking 'read more'? I think it's QUITE valuable to reiterate the whole debacle and reflect on what WE AS A COMMUNITY are doing to the reporting of news.
So this FEATURE (not a news story, mind you) recants and reflects upon the fact that Bruce Parens jumped the gun on a 'private' (ie. slightly less avialable than slashdot) forum, got a bit lambasted by Slashdot readers, and Bruce recanted. Now we take a moment to analyze the process.
I think this serves two very valuable purposes for good journalism from Slashdot: 1) Tells the casual shareholders that it's okay, the big bad Open Source amoeba isn't going to try to eat Corel. and 2) Highlights an important changing trend in the process of news event and idea sharing.
I see so many messages on this thread talking about the 'old Slashdot'. Well, akin to what this article is saying, I'm sorry boys and girls but we're out of the GARDEN OF EDEN and the AGE OF INNOCENCE is gone. Slashdot is a NEWS MEDIUM, in the SAME class as the big boys-- more so perhaps, because I know I for one give Slashdot more credibility than most other news sources because of the wide open forum attached to each story.
Slashdot informs, influences, and it's a good idea to take a moment to be self-consious of the process.
Without money nothing happens (Score:2)
Re:Oh shut up ! (Score:2)
This is not a problem (Score:2)
In terms of the actual event (not the posting to Slashdot) I think it not unreasonable for Bruce to get angry. Not ideal maybe, but quite understandable. I think the under-18 Debian developers deserve some anger in their behalf. I'll bet Corel knows Bruce was angry. This is good.
The negative consequences described seem to be mainly that the corporate Linux supporters and those yet to be will take from this that the Linux community is sue-happy and will back off, or not extend support. This is unreasonable. First, any who read Slashdot already know that hundreds of us will yell "Sue!" at a perceived GPL violation. Bruce is rather mellow compared to some in that regard. However the fact is that the GPL remains untested in court to this day. Since such a case would more likely revolve around the right to distribute rather than money, I don't believe there is likely to be one soon, even with the increased commerical support. It's a no-win proposition unless a critical principle is involved.
Finally, copyrights are *only* meaningful if they are defended. If a company truly violates the GPL and won't change we *should* sue them. Since the results of losing the case could be catastrophic, we need to pick the case extremely carefully however, and this spat with Corel doesn't cut it, at least as it appears to me.
Re:Importance Comparison (Score:2)
They would be if he sued them...
Actually, I don't think Corel really has to worry about what us geeks think of it at all, there not planning on selling to us anyway. First of all, and I may be wrong about this, I would think that most of us just upgrade there systems when new components come out, ass opposed to buying a whole new distro. Ether that, or we would just download one off an FTP somewhere, or buy from Cheapbytes (witch is what I did).
But even if that wasn't the case, it still wouldn't matter, Corel is not going after the 'hardcore geek' with this distro, there going after the home market. They're going after the pseudo-geeks, the 'power users' the people that buy their computers pre-built from tiger software. "The complete Corel Linux word-perfect workstation, only $599 with an AMDk6-2 350." There going for people who are going to be buying there stuff off store shelves. The people who are going to buy Corel linux, are the ones with witch Corel has mindshare then Red Hat, and I'm pretty sure that those people don't give a f*ck about what Bruce Perns thinks, or the GPL.
On the hand, if He, and the debian people sued them, it would definitely cause problems.
--
"Subtle mind control? Why do all these HTML buttons say 'Submit' ?"
So where *can* Net celebs speculate? (Score:3)
I still have two problems with Hemos's posting.
First, I think Bruce's preferences (for where his words appear) should be respected. If he'd wanted a discussion on this in Slashdot, likely to be picked up by WSJ/NYT/Salon/Wired/etc., he certainly knew how to submit it, and the Slashdot editorial staff would have posted it in seconds (and Bruce knew that too). He didn't, so presumably, he didn't.
Second, if Bruce can't quietly raise a suggestion such as this on debian-legal, where *can* he raise it? Alan Greenspan can meet with his peers behind closed doors. Bruce could have (maybe should have) picked a few close friends on the list and asked them to keep the subject private for the moment; not clear he would have gotten the kind of feedback he needed.
I know privacy on debian-legal (or lots of places on the net) is not guaranteed. That doesn't mean it shouldn't be respected.
Re:Guarded Comments (Score:2)
In the article you write
Legitimate, thats the point here.
I wouldn't say it was illegitimate to post this, but it was not clever. I know it wasn't done with this intention, but the same headline could have been in a not-open-source-friendly magazine, followed by some comments about unreliability for corporations working with open source and the whole fud we all know and hate.
The danger of this happening because of slashdots covering of bruce's small email should have been clear.
As others have pointed out, this was not a press release, but a posting in a mailing list. I'm not advocating the point of view that public mailing lists, even small ones, are private. But they are not a oneway medium too, and perhaps slashdot should have awaited some discussion in this list to make sure there is really a greater mass of people sharing the opinion of the post. Or should have asked Bruce personally if this really is his opinon.
All in all, what should have happened is weighting the consequences of bringing that matter to slashdot (early) against slashdot's right to run legitimate news.
One example, when I look at the linux-kernel mailing list, I sometimes see an exchange of personal insults (aka kernel traffics's "heated discussion"). It would be easy to snip away some context (or even cite full emails) and make a bad headline about a split between kernel developers.
Slashdot would never do this, because one head to be intentionally evil against linux for this.
But what slashdot did here unintentionally was IMO the same.
So my point is, bruce made a failure, but slashdot made a failure too.
Re:Oh shut up ! (Score:2)
For those of us who didn't have hours to read the whole thread, it was a good summary of the events that happened. I had no idea that people were complaining to Hemos about posting it (And I think that's silly, if someone posts to a mailing list, then its public information)
--
"Subtle mind control? Why do all these HTML buttons say 'Submit' ?"
Re:This is not a problem (Score:3)
Second, I wonder how GPL would appear in court - who would plead in favour of it, and how?
Third, a comment from Roblimo's article:
But when Bruce advocates a lawsuit against Corel for violating the GPL, even if he rapidly recants, he's effectively putting any investment Corel has in Linux at risk.
The thing is, that's only half of the story - to be nice and rebellious, if Corel cock things up so badly twice on the trot, and make a distribution that brings the name of Debian into disrepute (as this most surely has, because it's aw ful and broken [deja.com], then something needs done to sort them out. We *can't* have them going round bungling up the licensing in such a way as to offend the linux community, let alone twice.
The only concern I have with that is whether Corel has invested anything of use in Linux - given that I don't want more lame newbies coming to linux (those who are uninterested in it for its own sake, that is), and throwing money at it doesn't get anywhere... what is there to show, certainly that appeals to me?
Re:And he saw: Usenet was good (Score:2)
I agree in part. The problem is that all the really good web sites also have user contributions/feedback so such a mechanism is clearly needed.
Re:Elder Statesperson (Score:2)
So I think they are committed, like it or not.
D
----
Journalists should not be the story (Score:2)
I would strongly urge Rob et al to do a little research on what constitutes sound editorial policies. Slashdot's long term growth and reputation could be adversely affected without some care in this area.
SLASHDOT is a hard mistress... (Score:2)
I don't see this as Bruce Perens' fault, but Slashdot's. And yet, Robin is quick to dismiss this, and even inform us that he "growled" at Hemos for posting an apology. First off, where does Robin get the right to growl at Hemos? Hemos was here long before Robin ever was - Robin just came on board when Andover took over. Am I the only one who detects a note of arrogance in some of Robin's many editorials? Yes, yes, I know, if I don't like it, I don't have to read Slashdot. All I can say is, if I were Hemos, I don't think I would tolerate any "growling" from Robin's direction. The way Robin's long-winded editorials keep popping up (like the one about how to get women - how sickening was that), you'd think this will soon be Roblimo.Net. I miss the old /.
Re:I wonder if he can sing? (Score:2)
But this sounds like a great idea. A CD called "Geek Sounds"...
Track 1 would be Linus saying "Hello, this is Linus Torvalds, and I pronounce Linux as Linux."
Track 2 would be RMS singing "Join Us Now And Share the Software".
Track 3 would be "cat
Track 4 would be Bruce Perens doing a cover of Cher's "Believe".
The rest of the tracks would be the first 4 tracks run through various XMMS filters.
I guarantee that someone would buy it.
--
UserFriendly is a Harsh Mistress (Score:2)
Re:Shit may "Happen", but Bruce cleaned the mess u (Score:2)
--
Re:Gateway responsibilities (Score:2)
Considering all postings as fair game will damage the community's openness, because discussion will have to migrate from publicly available lists like debian-legal to closed, private lists that aren't archived and aren't accessible to the public, making the development community more insular and secretive. I don't want to see the honest technical discussion driven into hiding, just so that Slashdot can maintain a reputation for carrying breaking news. Roblimo is wrong; Slashdot was irresponsible in posting the article so quickly.
Re:Flawed Analysis (Score:5)
Here's what I've got on my scorecard:
1) Bruce said lawsuit time against Corel on a mailing list, not exactly private.
2) Another mailing list reader with an eye on what s/he considers important says "Damn. Bruce is calling for a lawsuit. That's serious." and sends to slashdot.
3) Hemos sees an item on Bruce saying "lawsuit against Corel for violating the GPL." This has come up once before with Corel. Bruce, for all intents and purposes of source checking, appears to have said it. Post it.
4) Bruce doesn't feel so strongly about suing Corel and publically recants. Note, he doesn't say he was misquoted, he says he's changed his mind.
5) Hemos sees a full mail box of people telling him he's a troll for posting the item when Bruce has recanted. Hemos posts an apology.
6) Roblimo points out that Bruce and Hemos got bit by the rapidness of the medium and the attention paid to Bruce and Slashdot in general.
7) People crap on Roblimo for pointing out points 1-5 in point 6.
At no point do I think anyone acted irresponsibly. Bruce is most certainly allowed to change his mind and, if he's aware of the medium he's in, that can be quite public.
What is notable here is that a process that has taken weeks at a paper I used to work for took place in the space of 2-3 days. Big plus: Hemos and Roblimo have made an effort to tone down the orginal item when it became quite apparent that Bruce was toning down his call for action.
Slashdot acted entirely appropriately. I appreciate knowing that Bruce orginally did call for a suit against Corel. It certainly stimulated a lot of, hopefully postive, discussion regarding defense of the GPL. I also am happy to know Corel won't face a suit, since that is the complete status *right now.*
I think if we want fast news from Slashdot or anywhere else, news organizations need to be allowed to make the best judgements they can. Here, Slashdot did. They also need to allow for the story to change over time, which Slashdot also did. Otherwise, with an eight hour, "let everybody be absolutely 110% sure they can't be sued by what they are saying." for every story, nothing would be news.
Thanks Bruce, for making your opinion known.
Thanks hemos, for letting the community what was being discussed.
Thanks Bruce, for thinking twice.
Thanks slashdot for keeping the discussion active.
Thanks Roblimo, for making some sense of it all.