The Spotlight is a Harsh Mistress 199
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.
Hmm (Score:1)
I know that sounds silly, but really it depends on your context. If you're a record-label executive, Cher might be quite a bit more important than BP. In fact, in most places other than the Open Source Community, BP isn't very important at all.
I guess my point is that this isn't anything special. Everything is a matter of point-of-view, but in any situation there are people who are put into positions of importance (like Perens in the OSS community). It happens and when it does, these people either learn to handle the responsibility that comes along with it, or they drop out of the limelight and let someone else do the job. And, yes, that is possible and would not be hard for someone like Perens to do.
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
My take... (Score:1)
There, now that that's out of the way... I think, honestly, that if Bruce REALLY wanted what he said to be private, it would have been. If he didn't want people other than those intended to find out, he would have been able to do so.
As mentioned above, no open forum is PRIVATE, and to even think anything of the like is stupid. Granted a lot of our forms of PRIVATE comm aren't as private as we'd like them to be, but they're also not open.
If I wanted my wife to see some naked pictures of myself that I took (NO, that's never happened), I wouldn't put them in an open forum, and invite her there, cause that would be silly. I would send her an email with it attached. Yes, still not secure, but still a lot better.
Secondly, While I do agree with what was said concerning the openness of the forum in which it was posted, I almost feel like some sort of paparazzi agent.
I'm not a fan of National Enquirer, and if I were famous, I'm sure I'd be even less. I don't think that it makes sense to follow someone around until they do something "newsworthy". Seriously, Bruce is "newsworthy" all the time, he doesn't have to make a mistake to be on Slashdot, we all know this.
I understand that he's in the public eye, and that eye is heavily focussed on him, as it should be, but the original comment, at least in my opinion, wasn't newsworthy. It was paparazzi-ish (that a word?) at best. It wasn't dubbed as a press-release, it wasn't a "Statement" in the sense of which I'm thinking.
What happened was, he was a little too free when someone was watching. Plain and simply.
With great power comes great responsibility Bruce, and yes, you'd probably do just a little better to keep that more in the forefront of your mind, but at the same time, I surely do sympathize. I do FAR too many stupid things in public.
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
Re:Oh shut up ! (Score:1)
does it matter that much to everybody? (Score:1)
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:Cher Vs. Bruce Perens (Score:1)
-----
Re:Hmm (Score:1)
Re:Hmm (Score:1)
First of all: What the heck do I need with more karma? I've already got 74 and it's not like they're going to give me another +1. Moreover, I didn't even use my +1 on that last comment. Sheesh.
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
Re:Bottome line...??? (Score:1)
At any rate, what are your thoughts?
Added value. (Score:1)
-----
I wonder if he can sing? (Score:1)
Do you think he'd open source the lyrics?
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
Re:This isn't 'the end' - it's just reality. (Score:2)
So who was it who said. (Score:1)
I dont know. Though I did once have a lecturer who once said.
"There is no such thing as power, without responsibility " {he was teaching C programming}.
Cher has a new boyfriend? :-) (Score:1)
Just my $0.02.
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.
Importance Comparison (Score:1)
for a community movement. Cher is a
I don't really know much about Cher. I don't think
the original author was arguing that Perens is
more important to society at large (not that that
would be a hard claim to make), but that Perens is
certainly more influential to geek culture. Perens
does more than program (programming presumably
being the best parallel to doing music), he
influences other programmers and portions of the
movement.. I think this shows clearly that
Perens is more important than Cher, at least in
their relative contexts. Also, record executives
arn't doomed if Cher badmouths them -- likely they
don't suffer a bit, so I would argue that Perens
is more important in a global sense.
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)?
Sounds of the geeks! (Score:1)
Get RMS, ESR, Torvalds, Tale, Ritchie, and all
the others who have made big contributions to
the Unix community, and have them play music for
a CD. I'd certainly get a copy of that
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."
We have a BIG can of worms here (Score:1)
Taking this trend just one step further, we would all have to guard our speech in all but the most private circumstances. Even all of us nobodies posting here on slashdot should exercise caution so our remarks won't come back to bite us in twenty years time, when we all are rich and powerful (yeah, right...) or simply when applying for a job.
People considering a tattoo are often asked to think long and hard about whether they will still like it ten or twenty years later. Comments on slashdot or mailinglists have the same kind of permanence, and can be potentially far more embarrassing than a heart-and-dagger on your shoulder.
Re:Oh shut up ! (Score:1)
Okay, it starts out as a kind of excuse for the BP story. But there is much more to it, and I like those "philosophical" stories (or "rants", if you will).
Even in a newspaper you find comments and columns by the editors, where they give their opinions. I think that's perfectly acceptable, also on Slashdot.
<><
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:Oh shut up ! (Score:1)
If you are complaining that this is not news, might I remind you that it is a Feature, and was not presented as news. If it offends you so much, ignore it, or better yet, filter it.
//Phizzy
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.
Re:Importance Comparison (Score:1)
of the situation. I'm saying rather that the words
of Perens have the potential to greatly influence
companies or groups that deal with our community.
Corel may suffer because of Perens' words, but
I wasn't trying to imply that that was a bad thing.
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. :)
--
Besides... (Score:1)
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
Translation (Score:1)
Yes, he is "more important". (Score:1)
Amount that I care about Bruce Perens: 0.01
Amount that I care about Frank Zappa: 0.1
So by any objective standard (this is assuming that any objective standard is "how much antizeus cares"), Bruce Perens is more important than Cher, though less important than Frank Zappa.
Re:Hmm (Score:1)
It depends on who you are and what is important to you.
Cher may well be more important to a record-label exec (or not, maybe the exec only does country or rap music). Cher is probbably more important to a divorced woman seeking a role model.
Bruce is almost certonally more important to open-software types (unless they are also a divorced woman seaking a role model... or a pop music record exec...).
To someone who is none of the above, I expect Bruse will have a more lasting change in their life. After all most people interact with software somehow, and unless Open Source's main arguments are all crap, Bruce has the chance to improve the quality of a vast amount of software. Thus slightly, but definitly, improving the lives of most people. At least the "most people" who use electricity, and the internet, and such.
P.S.: I'm not attempting to imply that Cher is the only, or best female role model, merely that she is probbably more accessable to females as a role model then most anyone with a first name of "Bruce".
If I misunderstand the application of role models, I'm sorry, I guess life tought me a few wrong lessons. Please feel free to set me stright.
P.P.S. I'm not trying to imply that Cher is a bad role model either. Judging almost entirely from the VH-1 behind the music show, she seems very happy (at long last) with her life. That's a good goal for anyone. Not to mention the film and music...wait, I said not montioning it right?
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)
too general (Score:1)
Yes, it is good to allow anonymous posts to protect free speech, but at the same time it can degrade the quality of a forum. People are lazy, and if they want to know how to use the chmod command, which is easier... take 2 minutes to find it on the web, or 30 seconds to post it to a help forum? Add 2 minutes of hassle to register, and they won't bother the people on the help forum that are (hopefully) discussing something a little more time-worthy.
As for a community aspect, registration is both good and bad. It insures that a defined community is there, but it discourages the passerby from jumping in and possibly becoming a regular.
In a very political and/or controversial forum, requiring registration can be very bad. Many people want to get their point across, but not be hassled by people who don't think they're exactly politically correct.
I'll be right back, my coffee cup is empty.
-----
Re:Hmm (Score:1)
--
Harvey
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:Hmm (Score:1)
So here we have a person, who basically has contributed very little of real value to society. She entertained ages ago, and now is entertaining again. Yes, this has value. But as much value as the work of a man who is a Large Part of the Open Source movement. A movement that is making quite the impact in the computer/Internet bits of society. True, it's relative and what not, but Bruce/Linus/RMS/ESR/Wall/etc are doing more that makes themselves more important.
And as long as we're talking about people taking the limelight and doing a foot-in-mouth, remember that RMS was and still is quite controversial. His best comments were made in the day when
And anyone who wants a humorous take on the Corel 18+ thing, go read todays UFIE [userfriendly.org].
Re:Cher Vs. Bruce Perens (Score:1)
the power of slashdot (Score:1)
i think robin's main point here was very well thought out and spoken: we need to treat events like this one as learning experiences and grow up as a community.
he missed one huge point, though, which has been gnawing at me for some time: slashdot has an insane amount of power, which can be abused. yeah, only a tiny portion of the content of /. is posted as headlines, but it is those headlines that attract attention to a topic and essentially guide the community.
even in an anarchistic society such as the internet and (to a lesser extent) slashdot, people can be influenced. and right now slashdot has a lot of power to influence.
for a good reason slashdot can't and doesn't post everyone's "pet projects". i have had articles accepted and rejected. when i have had my articles rejected in the past i have wondered why my contribution wasn't considered "News". slashdot has the power to make or break a project. that's a lot of power...being able to decide what and what isn't news. and it's frightening to me.
Bruce's comment wouldn't have gotten nearly the attention it got had the article not been posted on slashdot. the main question that arises (at least for me) is whether it should have been posted at all. i personally am not subbed to the debian-legal mailing list. was his comment of importance enough that i should have even known that he made the comment? i don't think so. not that i think there should be censorship on slashdot, but that drawing too much attention to one person's angered comments on an "obscure" mailing list is dangerous.
there has been an increase in the amount of power which can be wielded in our community, and i believe that will grow exponentially in the future, as more "real world" interest is shown in OSS. we have been dealing with that newfound power pretty well up until now, but this "incident" makes me wonder if we're ready for it.
i think one powerful and necessary addition to /. would be an open-ended discussion of slashdot itself. a section, right alongside the rest, where issues relating to slashdot and the community can be discussed without forcing people to tack on off-topic posts to articles...venting their frustrations or love of slashdot.
if someone has a problem with how slashdot is doing something, they should be able to have their voice heard.
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:Translation (Score:1)
Re:Flawed Analysis (Score:1)
LOOK AT ME, I'M QUONSAR, WATCH ME WRITE A LONG POINTLESS POST IN A GAY ATTEMPT TO GET MORE KARMA SO I CAN WHACK OFF TO MY KARMA SCORE
Uh, there is goes, yea, up another 2 points, uh, oh, yes, yes, I'M CUMMING AHRHFHYEHRHRGFJSSJHRR....
ahhh...
======
"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:My take... (Score:1)
A mailing list is similar, I think. You are more likely to say things there (you're talking to people you know and who you share interests with) than you would in public (not a pub, but in the streets or wherever). It's just different.
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.
all the comments??? impossible! (Score:1)
I do agree with Slashdot's policy of anti-censorship. But i don't think Rob has the time to read every comment that's spelled with caps and digits.
Re:Flawed Analysis (Score:3)
Re:The Eighteen thing was a complete overreaction. (Score:1)
Re:Roblimo's the man (Score:1)
People make their mistakes. The
Who needs ACs? (Score:1)
What do we need ACs for? I mean, what amount of information about myself do I give away by creating an account? It's not that I need any ID or anything. If I am planning on contributing stuff here (and setting my own preferences, etc.), I *will* create an account. And if I am going to act like an asshole
Re:Oh shut up ! (Score:1)
//Phizzy
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.
--
Re:all the comments??? impossible! (Score:1)
Me? I try to take my lumps when I error. Like, oops forgot the offtopic:humor prefix, or say something really dumb and not notice. That's life. Ask A.Greenspan.
So, roblimo, I miss BBS but open is KooL. However, a heads-up like this does help open debate, kind of like "ras and cas refresh", now and again the brain needs a jolt. -d
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.
Re:Bottome line...??? (Score:2)
Re:Guarded Comments (Score:2)
But this is relevant in this case only that it rules out that slashdot wanted to harm bruce/linux, analogous to the fictional linux-kernel story.
But if they didn't want to harm linux (which they surely didn't), it was a failure to neglect the nature of a mailing-list, cause the only "news" we got here was "Bruce Perens did one post....".
It even didn't say "there's currently a discussion at debian-legal, started by Bruce Perens, about
I agree with you that all in all this was a proof for the "community's" appreciation of the big names. It proofed even more, it showed that despite negative voices we sometimes hear about "what has come out of slashdot", the system as a whole is capable to produce sensible feedback.
So where *can* Net celebs speculate? (Score:2)
Slashdot is about journalism. I know that a lot of the time it seems to be about linux or about OSS, but it is one of the purest forms of journalism around. These things just shine through because they interest us.
It could be said that Slashdot has a positive effect on the Open Source Community, but would you have a story held back because it is potentially damaging to said community?
Slashdot and responsible journalism (Score:2)
Other incidents such as slashdot prematurely posting various unfounded "conspiracy theories" ( Corel dropping WINE, etc ) serve little purpose other than to draw several predictable knee-jerk rants from ignorant readers, in a manner reminiscent of 1984's two minutes of hate. Rather than slashdot commentating on how hard it is to deal with the tabloid-like linux press, slashdot ( who ARE the only "linux tabloid" ) could perhaps improve matters by choosing their front page stories more judiciously.
Re:Really? Then... (Score:2)
Just about the only case where I would consider a mailing list to fall outside of this definition is one that you must be "authorized" to join. There are lists out like this, such as ones to help people through the loss of a significant loved one. I would definately consider quoting a post on one of those closed/secure mailing lists to be a breach of privacy and unethical for a journalist to do. But, any mailing list which is joinable simply be sending an email to a listserv or majordomo or website is by definition "open" and considered a public forum.
Press is a valuable commodity (Score:2)
Bruce
'...the rules are being changed by us...' (Score:2)
But just because it's the most obviously revolutionary thing happening doesn't make it the most revolutionary. What CmdrTaco and the boys are doing is pretty revolutionary too - to take another of today's stories [slashdot.org], for example, it's the Slashdot effect [slashdot.org] which surges huge flows of traffic around the Web. It isn't the Times [the-times.co.uk] effect, the CNN [cnn.com] effect or the BBC [bbc.co.uk] effect, and it isn't because these bodies, skilled and resourced at newsgathering as they are, have not managed to exploit this new medium in the way that Slashdot has.
What I'm suggesting is that Slashdot may be to Berners-Lee as The Times was to Caxton, or CNN has been to Logie Baird: the body which has most effectively discovered the formula to harness the new technology to journalism, and which will in the long run influence the way in which journalism on the medium is presented.
Of course I may be wrong here; I may be simply absurdly overestimating Slashdot's importance. But at the same time I can't help betting that there are executives in half the media coroprations in the world lying awake at night wondering how they let Andover [andover.net] get away with such a bargain, and executives at Andover lying awake at nights wondering what to do with it.
We all (I assume) believe this medium is powerful, and yet we're all continually being surprised by how powerful it is. And so, from time to time, we get surprised when stories like this blow up out of nowhere. This is another sort of Slashdot effect , a consequence of using a powerful technology when you don't have enough experience with it to know instinctively the potential consequences of your actions.
What I liked about this story is that it is Slashdot introspecting about Slashdot. Introspection is something which, as Eric Raymond has often pointed out [tuxedo.org], we in the open source movement don't do enough of. When what you're doing is revolutionary, when the waters which you are navigating are uncharted, if you don't think carefully about what you're doing you are likely to do much less well than you otherwise might.
So Rob (and everyone else who has contributed), don't be upset by accusations of self indulgence. Sometimes looking at what we're doing, trying to understand what we're doing, and, most importantly, trying to understand the consequences of what we're doing, are as important as doing it.
Viva la revoluçion!
Background checks.. (Score:2)
(Emphasis mine)
"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."
(Emphasis mine)
Stories that break here? Alright. We have stories that appear on the Slashdot mainpage, as well as features, articles, polls, etc. What happens next? Slashdot is an open, public discussion board. Thanks to Rob's wonderful leadership, we can have this as uncensored as we want, too. It's not a news service, and any background checking and points are generally made by the people who post to these forums.
Admittedly, some of the more vapouristic rumours should have some Slashdot staff background checking, but they have to wade through a lot of story submissions each day, not to mention general server maintenance, etc. They post stuff, we discuss and perhaps even reach a conclusion. This is not the news, this is information that Slashdot readers find interesting. Using Slashdot as a basis for a New York Times or Wall Street Journal article, is like writing a story based on some subway bum's ramblings.
Speculation in online forums should not be used as inspiration for the news.
---
Re:Really? Then... (Score:2)
And, since I'm saying it on
Re:I agree completely (Score:2)
Damn straight.
He only sent it to several hundred people he didn't know.
Rediculous bastards (Score:2)
What shocks me is not the speed at which Bruce's opinions were made public, but the speed with which he changed them upon the advice of the Slashdot hoarde. Are we all to be a herd of stupid sheep? Are our well-considered opinions this flexible?
An open offer to Corel: I will post a public retraction of this Slashdot post for the bargain price of $45,000. Figure out what it's worth to your stockholders, and send me an email.
The same offer is not open to a herd of fifty Slashdot readers who disagree with my opinions.
- But, don't you think it was inappropriate for Slashdot to take Bruce's remarks from the list and post them without asking him?
- What about our relationship with Corel?
- Perhaps, but the lawsuit was still premature.
I think it's time we evaluated this issue in perspective, and quit our en masse ass-kissing knee-jerk reactions. For the good of the project, let's quit talking about our respective issues and worry about what we believe is best for the software we're writing.I think the only reason people are saying this is, because, given hindsight, it is a naively obvious way to ``make everyone happy.'' It doesn't make any sense. Lists are public. Slashdot is public. Lists are a place where things are discussed and ideas are hashed out, where disagreements and agreements take place. Slashdot is the same thing--it is nothing but a highly moderated web-based mailing list. If you think there is such a thing as ``news,'' in a world of its own, you are mistaken. News is anything that happens. It is not a flavour of cereal, or anything else packaged in shrinkwrap and branded with a logo. Today's media has convinced you that ``ethical'' news is news that doesn't piss off any large corporations, or important individuals, or incite people to argue and think for themselves. Anything which does these things, even if it's otherwise newsworthy, is somehow ``unethical.'' I call this shame, prudence, backrubbing, or collusive materialistic compromise. Ethics indeed!
Relationship? Hah! So-called ``Commercial interest'' in Linux may be a good thing, but I think its importance is overpercieved. We are used to commercial OS's like OS/2 dying because there aren't enough ``programs to run,'' or something. This is nonsense in the present day and age, when people only want web browsers, word processors, and video games--the elusive ``Killer App'' at Comdex, that is, app, singular. Commercial interest is not important to Linux's success, and Corel can pucker up their arrogant little lips and kiss my ass for all I care about their ``contribution'' to the Linux community, which so far seems to amount to nothing but vaporware hype that makes our optimism seem progressively less warranted, a notoriously buggy distribution that distracts new users from better-architected less-expensive compilations, flagrant violations of the GPL, and an unwillingness to enter respectful dialogue with representatives of the open projects that permit their existence.
What are you waiting for, then? They violated the license, and the effects of their violation were exactly what the license was intended to prevent: they stole Debian's code and distributed it in an unfree manner, and then disrespectfully ignored the Debian folk--the representatives of the developers whose work they illegally stole. They apparently feel they can take Debian and do with it whatever they like, but for better or worse GNU/Linux is under the GPL, and they are mistaken. How much is this ``professional relationship'' worth to the Linux community? Is it worth losing control of the project? Is it worth losing the credibility and enforcability of Open Source licenses? I think it's worse less than that. A lot less.
Speed of open source journalism? (Score:2)
1) Bruce declares a lawsuit
2) The newpaper reporters write up the story
3) Bruce retracts his law suit after taking advice
4) The newpaper reporters get this also, and the editor kills the story, or amends it so that the tone is lessened.
It would have never gotten into the public eye.
With Slashdot and other online news sources, things like this get reported as they happen, and storys get updated as things come in. CNN is a good example of how this is - a story breaks; they publish a short piece on what happened, and update as details come in.
This type of journalism has the same turnaround as open source software. Compared to the old style print, it travels light years faster, and things get fixed just as fast.
I don't think anyone should be berated or flamed for posting a breaking story like the Corel incident. It is news, and should be reported.
This sort of thing will happen again, and people should be aware that whatever they post on the net will be read by a lot of people, and if they are anyway powerful at all, will be reprinted shortly afterwards.
This is not to say that people should say nothing at all.
When making a statement like this people should send out feelers to decide if their idea will fly and will be backed up. This will not always work - it's hard to lead by mob, but with legal issues and major changes of direction its often a good idea to gauge feelings first.
rather people should be aware that once they have made a position public, they will have to make sure th
Re:Who needs ACs? (Score:2)
Let's say you work at a software company, and you know something that could be benificial to the community that you want to share. However, you do not want what you say getting back to your employers (for whatever reason).
Then you create a new hotmail/yahoo/whatever address and get a new account created just for that post, or for posts where you want to remain anonymous....that seems about as anonymous as AC does anyway.
All people will do is create accounts, still act like idiots and create new accouts if Rob deletes them (if he even does that).
Hopefully he won't delete them; just let their karma carry them down to default Score: -1. Sure there would still be some people who would go to the bother of creating a new account, just to scrawl some idiocy, but far fewer than we currently have...
dylan_-
--
Re:Moderators. (Score:2)
I'm glad the majority of moderators understand the importance of satisfying interpersonal communications, and that these interpersonal connections are what many seek whilst reading this material.
Others are here to prove their worth, judge truth and distinctiveness, merit similarity with the blade of a zealot, and portray lies where there are none. Just like any physical community, there are those that seek similarities to bind and strengthen, and those that seek to improve themselves at the expense of others.
(Not to divide society into two factions. Everyone knows there are two types of people: those that divide people into two types of people and those that do not. Unless everyone divides everyone into two types of people or vise versa.)
Ok, that's offtopic enough for me. ;)