Hi!
I didn't want to voice this concern before the conference (figuring that, like me, the planning team had plenty to do already), but now I have something pretty important to say. Read on.
Some background: I'm a Free Software user. That means that when you tell me "Southern California Linux Expo", I wonder why "GNU" isn't included. I also wonder why BSD and Haiku (among other, non-Linux operating systems) are included.
But those things are not the real reason I'm emailing today. It is because, this year, I noticed a marked absence of free software talks and programs. The FOSS Mentoring program, which was a step in the right direction, remained (though, I think, was added very late). Many other, new programs were added that represent the Open Source ideals. There are also new programs that represent the Linux community. There were presentations on nonfree cloud services (in fact, the Saturday keynote focused on one). There were several presentations on Oracle projects, which cannot be in *perfect* keeping with Free Software ideals. In fact, the only other example of a Free Software presentation I can see is Tom Callaway's, for which I commend him.
This brings me to a question: Is the Free Software community so diminutive that no speakers wanted to address them? Or is this a preference of the SCaLE planners that is manifesting in policy? Another question: Is it wise, given this conference's need for attendees, to systematically exclude any community that would otherwise want to attend? I hope to discuss this further upon replies.
I, for one, refused to attend for those very reasons, so I hope that you will consider changing these policies, or maybe asking for term-agnostic presentations, before next year's conference. Thanks.
If you look at the mission statement on [1], the topic for SCALE is Open Source software. We do not restrict ourselves to only Free Software, nor do we give special consideration to Free Software. SCALE tries to cater to everyone, thus there is a good mix of talks about various aspects of Open Source software.
With regards to your claim that Tom Callaway's talk is the only Free Software talk, I would like to point out Bradley Kuhn from the FSF gave a talk as well. While you may feel Oracle projects are not "perfectly" Free Software, as far as I am concerned, BTRFS is licensed under the GPL, and thus equally as Free as any other software licensed under the GPL.
Additionally, Debian probably have had a booth at SCALE every year, and the FSF and SFLC have had booths at SCALE in past years.
If you feel Free Software is under-represented, please encourage Free Software speakers to submit presentations for future SCALE events, and for Free Software groups to apply for a booth at SCALE.
[1] https://www.socallinuxexpo.org/scale10x/about-scale [2] https://www.socallinuxexpo.org/scale10x/presentations/12-years-floss-license...
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 07:22:19PM -0800, Mark Holmquist wrote:
Hi!
I didn't want to voice this concern before the conference (figuring that, like me, the planning team had plenty to do already), but now I have something pretty important to say. Read on.
Some background: I'm a Free Software user. That means that when you tell me "Southern California Linux Expo", I wonder why "GNU" isn't included. I also wonder why BSD and Haiku (among other, non-Linux operating systems) are included.
But those things are not the real reason I'm emailing today. It is because, this year, I noticed a marked absence of free software talks and programs. The FOSS Mentoring program, which was a step in the right direction, remained (though, I think, was added very late). Many other, new programs were added that represent the Open Source ideals. There are also new programs that represent the Linux community. There were presentations on nonfree cloud services (in fact, the Saturday keynote focused on one). There were several presentations on Oracle projects, which cannot be in *perfect* keeping with Free Software ideals. In fact, the only other example of a Free Software presentation I can see is Tom Callaway's, for which I commend him.
This brings me to a question: Is the Free Software community so diminutive that no speakers wanted to address them? Or is this a preference of the SCaLE planners that is manifesting in policy? Another question: Is it wise, given this conference's need for attendees, to systematically exclude any community that would otherwise want to attend? I hope to discuss this further upon replies.
I, for one, refused to attend for those very reasons, so I hope that you will consider changing these policies, or maybe asking for term-agnostic presentations, before next year's conference. Thanks.
-- Mark Holmquist Student, Computer Science University of Redlands MarkTraceur@gmail.com
Scale-planning mailing list Scale-planning@lists.linuxfests.org https://lists.linuxfests.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scale-planning
If you look at the mission statement on [1], the topic for SCALE is Open Source software. We do not restrict ourselves to only Free Software, nor do we give special consideration to Free Software. SCALE tries to cater to everyone, thus there is a good mix of talks about various aspects of Open Source software.
I definitely understand this portion--in fact, my suggestion is to involve *more* free software, and *not* restrict yourself to Open Source or, really, any specific ideal.
With regards to your claim that Tom Callaway's talk is the only Free Software talk, I would like to point out Bradley Kuhn from the FSF gave a talk as well. While you may feel Oracle projects are not "perfectly" Free Software, as far as I am concerned, BTRFS is licensed under the GPL, and thus equally as Free as any other software licensed under the GPL.
True, but MySQL (which was the talk to which I referred, sorry for lack of clarity) is an example of software whose free-ness is suspect, especially where Oracle is involved!
And I did not claim that his was the only talk--I know Larry Cafiero also presented, and he's another speaker whose presentations, at least those I have seen, are term-agnostic.
Additionally, Debian probably have had a booth at SCALE every year, and the FSF and SFLC have had booths at SCALE in past years.
Of this, I am also aware. Your language, though, suggests that this year, the latter two decided not to come? Perhaps that is another indication of the necessity of what I'm suggesting.
If you feel Free Software is under-represented, please encourage Free Software speakers to submit presentations for future SCALE events, and for Free Software groups to apply for a booth at SCALE.
I will do my best, though my connection to other free software advocates is somewhat limited. My real suggestion, though I think I grasped at how to word it in my original message, is agnostic or at least all-inclusive terms in presentation titles and content, as well as on the website (in reference to your mission statement, certainly). That way, advocates of one side or another don't feel excluded, and the mission (which applies to all people on earth, via your link) is better served! Especially in the case where one side or another has important information, even if both are represented in equal terms __quantitatively__, it could be said that both are injured by feeling out-of-place in the other's presentations. Admittedly, this injury is by choice, but the flaming that occurs between OSS and FS is certainly not to be ignored.
Thanks for the quick reply!
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 09:09:56PM -0800, Mark Holmquist wrote:
If you look at the mission statement on [1], the topic for SCALE is Open Source software. We do not restrict ourselves to only Free Software, nor do we give special consideration to Free Software. SCALE tries to cater to everyone, thus there is a good mix of talks about various aspects of Open Source software.
I definitely understand this portion--in fact, my suggestion is to involve *more* free software, and *not* restrict yourself to Open Source or, really, any specific ideal.
In my mind, Free Software is a strict subset of Open Source software, so we do try to limit ourselves to only Open Source software. I have no problem with Free Software and I would like to see more of it as well.
With regards to your claim that Tom Callaway's talk is the only Free Software talk, I would like to point out Bradley Kuhn from the FSF gave a talk as well. While you may feel Oracle projects are not "perfectly" Free Software, as far as I am concerned, BTRFS is licensed under the GPL, and thus equally as Free as any other software licensed under the GPL.
True, but MySQL (which was the talk to which I referred, sorry for lack of clarity) is an example of software whose free-ness is suspect, especially where Oracle is involved!
Software where some parts are open source and some parts are not have been a hotly debated topic. However, MySQL is a popular open source database, for some definition of open source, and there is a lot of interest in it.
I'm not sure what MySQL talk you are talking about, are you referring to [3]? If so, it's not a talk about Oracle's MySQL, but rather all the different forks of MySQL, some of which are GPL only, and all of which exercised the GPL and forked Oracle's MySQL.
We also had a MySQL track on Friday, right next door to an equally long PostgresSQL (Free Software) track next door. To me, that seems pretty fair and not favoring one DB over the other.
Additionally, Debian probably have had a booth at SCALE every year, and the FSF and SFLC have had booths at SCALE in past years.
Of this, I am also aware. Your language, though, suggests that this year, the latter two decided not to come? Perhaps that is another indication of the necessity of what I'm suggesting.
I did not see their booths this year. I'm not in charge of the booth, but I doubt SCALE would tell the FSF they can't come. The more likely reason is the FSF did not send people to man their booth this year. One volunteer I know from the FSF was here, but that person no longer works for the FSF.
If you feel Free Software is under-represented, please encourage Free Software speakers to submit presentations for future SCALE events, and for Free Software groups to apply for a booth at SCALE.
I will do my best, though my connection to other free software advocates is somewhat limited. My real suggestion, though I think I grasped at how to word it in my original message, is agnostic or at least all-inclusive terms in presentation titles and content, as well as on the website (in reference to your mission statement, certainly). That way, advocates of one side or another don't feel excluded, and the mission (which applies to all people on earth, via your link) is better served! Especially in the case where one side or another has important information, even if both are represented in equal terms __quantitatively__, it could be said that both are injured by feeling out-of-place in the other's presentations. Admittedly, this injury is by choice, but the flaming that occurs between OSS and FS is certainly not to be ignored.
Since I believe FS is a strict subset of OSS, I doubt "people in the OSS camp" would be offended by FS.
SCALE is a great place to make personal connections. I also encourage you to come and participate, rather than staying home because you did not think there was enough FS material.
[3] https://www.socallinuxexpo.org/scale10x/presentations/mysql-diaspora
In my mind, Free Software is a strict subset of Open Source software, so we do try to limit ourselves to only Open Source software. I have no problem with Free Software and I would like to see more of it as well.
Well, pretty significantly, the two are separate communities, though the software classified under them might overlap. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html
And I have met many Open Source advocates who, when presented with a Free Software-only agenda, were angered to the point of flaming. I have also met the equivalent on the Free Software side (though it admittedly seems more dense there, perhaps in retaliation or frustration). Certainly there are very few considerations of the FSF at the conference, from what I've seen--official Twitter channel? iPhone apps? No GNU in the name? Flash videos for the streams (unverified)? Once again, start encouraging agnostic terms (Free/Libre/Open Source, for example), then maybe work into compromises that service everyone's needs. Maybe one day, this conference can truly represent digital freedom, but today, I'd settle for making everyone comfortable.
It's entirely possible that I'm making a general complaint that should rightly be personal, but regardless of its nature, it is a discrepancy between the mission and another part of the mission (see my previous message). That, at least, needs to be addressed. Does the conference truly wish to serve all people, or is it only people who feel comfortable with Open Source Software ideals? Does the conference really mean to focus only on Open Source, or do they really mean to incorporate other classifications as well?
Also, I want to re-iterate that I didn't "[stay] home because [I] did not think there was enough FS material[,]" though I think it might be a valid reason to someone. It would have been enough for me, and for everyone at the conference (I believe), to have represented all of the relevant communities at the conference: Open Source, Free Software, Creative Commons, Public Domain, Free Culture, Open Access....better to find a term that doesn't exclude any one (Free Culture, for example, is insanely inclusive, though maybe too broad for a software conference).
Does anyone have a good idea for an inclusive term? This is actually a major difficulty for the community, I think, in the face of the Open Source community, represented by a weaker term (see fsf article above), and the Free Software community, which is often perceived as too harsh or judgmental (e.g., RMS' comments on Steve Jobs), so if we can come up with a good term, it would have effects that extended past this conference (though the conference would undoubtedly reap the benefits of being a leader in this respect).
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 10:09:50PM -0800, Mark Holmquist wrote:
Certainly there are very few considerations of the FSF at the conference, from what I've seen--official Twitter channel? iPhone apps? No GNU in the name? Flash videos for the streams (unverified)? Once again, start encouraging agnostic terms (Free/Libre/Open Source, for example), then maybe work into compromises that service everyone's needs. Maybe one day, this conference can truly represent digital freedom, but today, I'd settle for making everyone comfortable.
Can you explain what's wrong from a FS person's POV with using Twitter as one of many communication channels used by SCALE to get its word out? And having an iPhone app as well as an Android app?
When I came up with the name SCALE, I thought it sounded better than SCAGLE.
Some of our videos in previous years are indeed served via Flash. At the time, there weren't many good alternatives to streaming video, so we did what's practical. Going forward, we certainly will try to make videos available via HTML5 video.
On 01/24/2012 09:50 PM, Lei Zhang wrote:
I did not see their booths this year. I'm not in charge of the booth, but I doubt SCALE would tell the FSF they can't come. The more likely reason is the FSF did not send people to man their booth this year. One volunteer I know from the FSF was here, but that person no longer works for the FSF.
The FSF had a booth at SCALE 10X this year, as it has in past years. As you mentioned earlier, Lei, Bradley Kuhn is a regular attendee and presenter at SCALE.
Since I was mentioned in an earlier exchange, I think I'll reply.
Mark, I think you're way off base with your implications that we don't include Free Software in SCALE. I think that Free Software is represented as much as it chooses to be -- and I think it's incumbent on those who advocate for Free Software to step up to the plate and submit talks.
Someone from KDE mentioned earlier that they were asked to present. I'd be interested to know who asked them, but they are right in one regard: Everyone essentially is "asked" to speak at SCALE in the form of asking anyone interested to submit proposals for talks. Some make it, some don't. That's the way of the world.
Free/Open Source Software represents a wide range, and unless you participate, you can't be a part of it. If you want to not attend SCALE because you think we're excluding Free Software advocates, that's your call. But that would make you the one being exclusionary, not us.
To address something you mention later -- I don't think it is in the scope of a mailing list that is aimed at organizing and planning an expo to discuss a more neutral term than FOSS that would suit your liking. You may want to cast that line elsewhere.
Larry Cafiero / FSF Member No. 5030
Hello,
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 9:50 PM, Lei Zhang leiz@ucla.edu wrote:
In my mind, Free Software is a strict subset of Open Source software,
They are different sets, but tend to encompass the same goals,. This link has been pointed out already: "Why Open Source misses the point of Free Software" http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html
And I currently can't find where ESR said he will do the exact opposite of RMS (ESR won't talk about the Free Software Movement, as he is in the OpenSource Movement).
I did not see their booths this year. I'm not in charge of the booth, but I doubt SCALE would tell the FSF they can't come. The more likely reason is the FSF did not send people to man their booth this year. One volunteer I know from the FSF was here, but that person no longer works for the FSF.
If you are talking about me, I never worked for the FSF, but the FSF did have a booth (thank you Garrett and SCALE) and I was there. There was 2 former employee's of the FSF that was at SCALE, so maybe you where thinking about them.
The FSF does have a, imho, a strange policy about not being listed at a conference that Linux and no "Free" in it's title. Maybe that was the reason the FSF was missed. If you really want to know why that policy is in place, I'll let you know.
Since I believe FS is a strict subset of OSS, I doubt "people in the OSS camp" would be offended by FS.
See above comment about ESR. Will try to find that link tomorrow.
Again, imho, I think this original question could have been asked with a little more tack.
m2c
Steve "the FSF volunteer"
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 10:36:30PM -0800, Steve M Bibayoff wrote:
Hello,
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 9:50 PM, Lei Zhang leiz@ucla.edu wrote:
In my mind, Free Software is a strict subset of Open Source software,
They are different sets, but tend to encompass the same goals,. This link has been pointed out already: "Why Open Source misses the point of Free Software" http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html
Thanks you Mark and Steve for pointing this out.
I did not see their booths this year. I'm not in charge of the booth, but I doubt SCALE would tell the FSF they can't come. The more likely reason is the FSF did not send people to man their booth this year. One volunteer I know from the FSF was here, but that person no longer works for the FSF.
If you are talking about me, I never worked for the FSF, but the FSF did have a booth (thank you Garrett and SCALE) and I was there. There was 2 former employee's of the FSF that was at SCALE, so maybe you where thinking about them.
The FSF does have a, imho, a strange policy about not being listed at a conference that Linux and no "Free" in it's title. Maybe that was the reason the FSF was missed. If you really want to know why that policy is in place, I'll let you know.
Ah, I had forgotten about this policy. So SCALE probably had a FSF booth every year.
So, I clearly misrepresented what I was trying to say in the first post, and I think I may have confused people. In further discussion, I tried to be more clear, but let me try once more.
Larry points out that it was my action, in part, that caused the lack of Free Software speakers at the conference--I would much rather focus on the intense focus, at the conference, on Open Source to the exclusion of everything else, than on the exclusion of any one community. See the bits in previous messages about the mission statement. My action certainly affected some magical ratio, at the conference, that represented FS-OSS relations, but it didn't necessarily change the Public Domain community's representation, so there are other groups (potentially) that need to be taken into account.
And as for the extolling of various, individual actions that happen to associate the conference very loosely with the Free Software (movement| community|Foundation), I again point you to the fact that I should originally have asked not about the exclusion of any one group, but the seeming favoritism applied to only one group (the Open Source community) which happened to strike me as providing a less-than-welcoming atmosphere.
Again, I don't expect this to be fixed, and I will consider speaking at the next conference (I hadn't come up with a topic, and was very busy this year), but I thought that the above-mentioned favoritism might be something that the planning committee might want to look into.
On 01/25/2012 06:00 AM, Mark Holmquist wrote:
Larry points out that it was my action, in part, that caused the lack of Free Software speakers at the conference
I said nothing even remotely associated with this statement. I said that everyone is welcome and that the door is open to participate. If you choose not to cross the threshold and participate, it's your call.
Again, I don't expect this to be fixed,
Because nothing is broken, but please continue . . .
and I will consider speaking at the next conference (I hadn't come up with a topic, and was very busy this year), but I thought that the above-mentioned favoritism might be something that the planning committee might want to look into.
I hope you do submit a talk at next year's SCALE. Also, I hope you consider speaking at other conferences, where you'll find pretty much the same open door, even if you want to consider yourself in some sort of subcategory separate from the FOSS paradigm as a whole.
Good luck.
On 01/25/2012 06:00 AM, Mark Holmquist wrote:
I would much rather focus on the intense focus, at the conference, on Open Source to the exclusion of everything else, than on the exclusion of any one community.
You've said this several times now, but you haven't said WHAT you believe we've done that favors one part of the community over any other with the exception of our name, which we're not going to change 10 years in.
Other than that, it is entirely unclear to me how you think we've favored anyone over anyone else. We don't generally _ask_ people to speak, we hold a call for papers, and then pick what we hope will be the best. There's no bias towards one side of the F/OSS community or the other.
Again: I'm very curious as to _what_ you think we've done to favor one part of the community. As others have pointed out, we've had speakers from every side of the community including the FSF. The ratio is pretty reflective of who decides to submit papers in our call for papers which is _very_ clearly open to _all_ - from the FSF to Microsoft. I would argue we are one of the most *inclusive* conferences out there.
Please be very specific. Do you think we throw all FSF papers in the trash? Or perhaps you're trying to imply we're being paid off by Oracle? Or perhaps you think we all secretly work for some company with an anti-FS agenda? Which isn't to say your trying to accuse anyone of anything so horrible - I'm simply trying to show what a specific example would look like. What *precisely* are you suggesting? It's very difficult to show you counter examples when I (or we) don't understand what exact think you believe we are doing. Because what I see is us advertising all over the place a call for papers... getting in a ton, many of our chairs spending countless time reading through them in their spare time, and picking a representative subset, not based on agenda, but based on what talks and speakers in the past have actually been popular, what appears to be well written, etc.
You've said this several times now, but you haven't said WHAT you believe we've done that favors one part of the community over any other with the exception of our name, which we're not going to change 10 years in.
All right, let's not get out of hand, folks. The two messages I received today had a somewhat less-than-understanding tone, so let me clarify myself.
I'm not insinuating anything sinister. I'm not even insinuating any intentional favoritism on the part of....well, anyone! I think that the mission statement (see previous messages) and various information pages about the conference happens to demonstrate a preference for one community over any other. In fact, the CFP [0] only mentions two, so any other communities might feel excluded from that.
Again, I don't allege any wrongdoing. I just suspect that SCaLE can do better to make people feel comfortable.
By the way, the lack of "GNU" in the name was among the list of things I *don't* expect to change right away, because it is viewed as impractical, and sometimes foolish, by most of the Open Source movement, who have demonstrably influenced the policy of SCaLE in the past (again, see the mission statement and the CFP, id.). It joined abandoning Twitter (which is a nonfree service), removing official iPhone implementations of information apps, and other similar drastic steps that, while maybe commonplace for free software-only conferences, would be very *out* of place, at least currently, for SCaLE.
I want to end this message by saying once again, strongly, decisively, and summarily that I do _not_ fault _any_ of the people involved with planning and running SCaLE for _anything_. They have nothing to be blamed for. I only ask for some discussion of how they can further excel in making people feel at home. While I once might have been criticizing the apparent exclusion of Free Software, I think further discussion on the subject has brought me to realize that there is a simpler and more neutral way to go about this, and that most claims I might have raised would have been baseless.
Thanks, all!
[0] https://www.socallinuxexpo.org/cfp/cfp-information
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 05:11:59PM -0800, Mark Holmquist wrote:
By the way, the lack of "GNU" in the name was among the list of things I *don't* expect to change right away, because it is viewed as impractical, and sometimes foolish, by most of the Open Source movement, who have demonstrably influenced the policy of SCaLE in the past (again, see the mission statement and the CFP, id.). It joined abandoning Twitter (which is a nonfree service), removing official iPhone implementations of information apps, and other similar drastic steps that, while maybe commonplace for free software-only conferences, would be very *out* of place, at least currently, for SCaLE.
So what alternatives do you have? Would it make you more happy if we don't use Twitter, Facebook, and G+ as communication channels? What do we do instead? Have you seen http://twitter.com/gnulinux ?
What's wrong with having an iPhone app for the SCALE schedule? Is it also against Free Software principles to have a win32 port of Emacs?
I don't like leaving questions unanswered, so I'm going to answer Lei's, but let's make this very clear:
I am *****not***** asking this list to consider the below concerns.
I am *****NOT***** even suggesting that they should so consider them.
I *****AM***** pretty sure that it's impossible to do at the current moment without the risk of alienating a large audience. Therefore, **************DO NOT************ consider implementing the alternatives below, at least until the world is less reliant on nonfree software and they can be implemented without losing any audience at all.
With that out of the way.....
So what alternatives do you have? Would it make you more happy if we don't use Twitter, Facebook, and G+ as communication channels? What do we do instead? Have you seen http://twitter.com/gnulinux ?
GNU Social, the Diaspora Project, and many other more specific-use sites endeavor to change the landscape. Identi.ca, too, is a very active, viable alternative. See http://www.fsf.org/share for the FSF's view on Twitter and others (likely that the channel to which you linked was set up by one of the FSF members who already had an account, or who didn't mind taking the risk).
What's wrong with having an iPhone app for the SCALE schedule? Is it also against Free Software principles to have a win32 port of Emacs?
The act of publishing an iPhone application isn't free, so you are directly supporting those applications when you even create one. The win32 port of GNU Emacs does reward people who use nonfree software, and they list Windows on their supported platforms, but they don't provide binaries at all. I think releasing generally functional source code cannot be looked upon as an act of endorsing one system or another. And, since SCaLE (I think) uses a third party to publish these apps, consider that supporting companies who support nonfree software is just as bad as supporting 20th Century Fox, who supports the MPAA, who supports SOPA. (I don't mean this as a trump card, it's only an analogy).
But, all of this aside, there is *no reason* for the conference to worry about these steps now. There are simpler, more basic things that need to be settled first!
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 05:49:10PM -0800, Mark Holmquist wrote:
since SCaLE (I think) uses a third party to publish these apps, consider that supporting companies who support nonfree software is just as bad as supporting 20th Century Fox, who supports the MPAA, who supports SOPA. (I don't mean this as a trump card, it's only an analogy).
By that rationale, I shouldn't go see movies?
But, all of this aside, there is *no reason* for the conference to worry about these steps now. There are simpler, more basic things that need to be settled first!
Like what? This is what I'm trying to get to, I don't actually understand what it is you ARE suggesting we do now.
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 05:57:30PM -0800, Phil Dibowitz wrote:
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 05:49:10PM -0800, Mark Holmquist wrote:
since SCaLE (I think) uses a third party to publish these apps, consider that supporting companies who support nonfree software is just as bad as supporting 20th Century Fox, who supports the MPAA, who supports SOPA. (I don't mean this as a trump card, it's only an analogy).
By that rationale, I shouldn't go see movies?
And not drive a car because I don't have the car computers' source code?
This is getting a bit silly. :)
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 05:49:10PM -0800, Mark Holmquist wrote:
I don't like leaving questions unanswered, so I'm going to answer Lei's, but let's make this very clear:
I am *****not***** asking this list to consider the below concerns.
I am *****NOT***** even suggesting that they should so consider them.
I *****AM***** pretty sure that it's impossible to do at the current moment without the risk of alienating a large audience. Therefore, **************DO NOT************ consider implementing the alternatives below, at least until the world is less reliant on nonfree software and they can be implemented without losing any audience at all.
With that out of the way.....
Don't get frustrated. I'm just trying to understand your position here. Thanks for explaining in more detail.
So what alternatives do you have? Would it make you more happy if we don't use Twitter, Facebook, and G+ as communication channels? What do we do instead? Have you seen http://twitter.com/gnulinux ?
GNU Social, the Diaspora Project, and many other more specific-use sites endeavor to change the landscape. Identi.ca, too, is a very active, viable alternative. See http://www.fsf.org/share for the FSF's view on Twitter and others (likely that the channel to which you linked was set up by one of the FSF members who already had an account, or who didn't mind taking the risk).
I don't know if SCALE use any of these communication channels, but I don't see why not. SCALE already has an Identi.ca account.
OK, so very clearly my answering questions was not a good idea. I will leave it, then, at this:
There is no political concern right now. The only concern is one of agnostic terms.
Even "Free/Libre/Open Source Software" could potentially be perceived as too specific by the Public Domain/Open Access/Free Culture community members who happened to be at the conference. And even the mere exclusion of someone's community can make them feel uncomfortable, even if the person speaking means no offense.
I don't expect that the conference can be perfect, even in this respect, but I think starting at "Free/Libre/Open Source" would at least be a step forward. Talking to presenters and staff members, encouraging use of that term in place of anything more specific, would benefit *everyone*, and not just any one community.
By the by--and this is still on the matter of inclusion, nothing else--it is probably not a good idea for conference volunteers to refer to others' ideals as "silly", thereby immediately making others uncomfortable in the conversation. I happen to forgo theatres and DVDs for the very reasons listed above--I don't think it makes me "silly", I think it makes me a concerned citizen who doesn't like corporate influence over my personal life. I don't know about the software in my car, but it is very limited. I would almost certainly ask about the software in my car if it did anything more than control a simple CD changer--GPS, for example, would greatly concern me. I imagine that people who have reached the same point in Free Software adoption would think very similarly.
Finally, please don't respond to this email (or any others) to weigh in on the merits of the Free Software philosoph(y|ies). I merely brought them up to illustrate points relating to the main topic, which is laid out in the first few paragraphs of this email.
Cheers,
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 6:31 PM, Mark Holmquist marktraceur@gmail.com wrote:
OK, so very clearly my answering questions was not a good idea. I will leave it, then, at this:
There is no political concern right now. The only concern is one of agnostic terms.
Even "Free/Libre/Open Source Software" could potentially be perceived as too specific by the Public Domain/Open Access/Free Culture community members who happened to be at the conference. And even the mere exclusion of someone's community can make them feel uncomfortable, even if the person speaking means no offense.
I don't expect that the conference can be perfect, even in this respect, but I think starting at "Free/Libre/Open Source" would at least be a step forward. Talking to presenters and staff members, encouraging use of that term in place of anything more specific, would benefit *everyone*, and not just any one community.
So how do we become more "inclusive"?
By the by--and this is still on the matter of inclusion, nothing else--it is probably not a good idea for conference volunteers to refer to others' ideals as "silly", thereby immediately making others uncomfortable in the conversation. I happen to forgo theatres and DVDs for the very reasons listed above--I don't think it makes me "silly", I think it makes me a concerned citizen who doesn't like corporate influence over my personal life. I don't know about the software in my car, but it is very limited. I would almost certainly ask about the software in my car if it did anything more than control a simple CD changer--GPS, for example, would greatly concern me. I imagine that people who have reached the same point in Free Software adoption would think very similarly.
Just to let you know, if your car is less then 30 years old almost every aspect of the the engine, transmission, Anti-lock brakes, and airbags are controlled by software.
Finally, please don't respond to this email (or any others) to weigh in on the merits of the Free Software philosoph(y|ies). I merely brought them up to illustrate points relating to the main topic, which is laid out in the first few paragraphs of this email.
Cheers,
-- Mark Holmquist Student, Computer Science University of Redlands MarkTraceur@gmail.com
Scale-planning mailing list Scale-planning@lists.linuxfests.org https://lists.linuxfests.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scale-planning
So how do we become more "inclusive"?
From the quoted text above your comment:
"I think starting at "Free/Libre/Open Source" would at least be a step forward. Talking to presenters and staff members, encouraging use of that term in place of anything more specific, would benefit *everyone*, and not just any one community."
Just to let you know, if your car is less then 30 years old almost every aspect of the the engine, transmission, Anti-lock brakes, and airbags are controlled by software.
Thank you, and Russell, for this information. As I don't expect SCaLE to be perfect, I don't expect myself to be so, at least not immediately. Hopefully one day, I will be financially able to purchase another car that includes free software--or perhaps switch to a bicycle :)
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 6:49 PM, Mark Holmquist marktraceur@gmail.com wrote:
So how do we become more "inclusive"?
From the quoted text above your comment:
"I think starting at "Free/Libre/Open Source" would at least be a step forward. Talking to presenters and staff members, encouraging use of that term in place of anything more specific, would benefit *everyone*, and not just any one community."
From the http://www.socallinuxexpo.org/scale10x:
"The Southern California Linux Expo (SCALE) is an annual Linux, Open-Source, and Free Software conference held in Los Angeles. Now celebrating its tenth year, this community organized event will be held January 20-22, 2012 at the Hilton Los Angeles Airport hotel."
So your objection is that Free does not come first?
Just to let you know, if your car is less then 30 years old almost every aspect of the the engine, transmission, Anti-lock brakes, and airbags are controlled by software.
Thank you, and Russell, for this information. As I don't expect SCaLE to be perfect, I don't expect myself to be so, at least not immediately. Hopefully one day, I will be financially able to purchase another car that includes free software--or perhaps switch to a bicycle :)
-- Mark Holmquist Student, Computer Science University of Redlands MarkTraceur@gmail.com
Scale-planning mailing list Scale-planning@lists.linuxfests.org https://lists.linuxfests.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scale-planning
From the http://www.socallinuxexpo.org/scale10x:
"The Southern California Linux Expo (SCALE) is an annual Linux, Open-Source, and Free Software conference held in Los Angeles. Now celebrating its tenth year, this community organized event will be held January 20-22, 2012 at the Hilton Los Angeles Airport hotel."
So your objection is that Free does not come first?
Well, there is a demonstrated tendency for that to be the case, at least on that page, but the mission statement [0] is significantly more exclusive. Also in reference to your link, there are *other* communities that could be included. As well, the speakers and volunteers could probably be more inclusive. My objection is that there are several areas where the conference could be more inclusive of all communities, but they are not. I only propose that we try to work on that for next year.
[0] https://www.socallinuxexpo.org/scale10x/about-scale
Mike,
Your car contains an engine control computer which handles every aspect of your car's engine operations. It also has as many as 20 other computers that handle things such as braking, climate control, the door locks, and many different things, all connected by a 2 wire bus. I am not weighing in on your other comments one way or another, but if it is your attempt to be consistent and uncompromising, get to writing and lobbying.
Sent from my iPad
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 05:11:59PM -0800, Mark Holmquist wrote:
I'm not insinuating anything sinister. I'm not even insinuating any intentional favoritism on the part of....well, anyone! I think that the mission statement (see previous messages) and various information pages about the conference happens to demonstrate a preference for one community over any other. In fact, the CFP [0] only mentions two, so any other communities might feel excluded from that.
Again, I don't allege any wrongdoing. I just suspect that SCaLE can do better to make people feel comfortable.
OK, so I'm looking for specific examples. The above implies you'd like to see our our mission and our CFP worded differently, and then this:
see the mission statement and the CFP, id.). It joined abandoning Twitter (which is a nonfree service), removing official iPhone implementations of information apps, and other similar drastic steps that, while maybe commonplace for free software-only conferences, would be very *out* of place, at least currently, for SCaLE.
Implies you'd like us to not use twitter, facebook, and g+.
Does that summarize what you'd like to see different?
I could see updating our mission to say "Free and Open Source software" or the more canonical "F/OSS". We can certainly discuss such a change.
The same change to our CFP - if we decide it makes sense for our mission - would presumably be reasonable.
Not using the standard media, however, I don't expect will happen. You don't convert more people to using F/OSS by only advertising on places where F/OSS users are. We post on identi.ca as well, of course... we cover as many methods of getting the word out there as possible.
in making people feel at home. While I once might have been criticizing the apparent exclusion of Free Software, I think further discussion on the subject has brought me to realize that there is a simpler and more neutral way to go about this, and that most claims I might have raised would have been baseless.
That's awesome. I'm glad. But I still feel like there's mostly implications of things you dislike as opposed to suggestions on what you'd like actually done (or done instead, or in addition to).
I worked the KDE booth this year and we were specifically asked if we would like to present a talk. Unfortunately none of us has time to prepare one this year.
-- Wayne
Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 24, 2012, at 8:57 PM, Lei Zhang leiz@ucla.edu wrote:
If you look at the mission statement on [1], the topic for SCALE is Open Source software. We do not restrict ourselves to only Free Software, nor do we give special consideration to Free Software. SCALE tries to cater to everyone, thus there is a good mix of talks about various aspects of Open Source software.
With regards to your claim that Tom Callaway's talk is the only Free Software talk, I would like to point out Bradley Kuhn from the FSF gave a talk as well. While you may feel Oracle projects are not "perfectly" Free Software, as far as I am concerned, BTRFS is licensed under the GPL, and thus equally as Free as any other software licensed under the GPL.
Additionally, Debian probably have had a booth at SCALE every year, and the FSF and SFLC have had booths at SCALE in past years.
If you feel Free Software is under-represented, please encourage Free Software speakers to submit presentations for future SCALE events, and for Free Software groups to apply for a booth at SCALE.
[1] https://www.socallinuxexpo.org/scale10x/about-scale [2] https://www.socallinuxexpo.org/scale10x/presentations/12-years-floss-license...
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 07:22:19PM -0800, Mark Holmquist wrote:
Hi!
I didn't want to voice this concern before the conference (figuring that, like me, the planning team had plenty to do already), but now I have something pretty important to say. Read on.
Some background: I'm a Free Software user. That means that when you tell me "Southern California Linux Expo", I wonder why "GNU" isn't included. I also wonder why BSD and Haiku (among other, non-Linux operating systems) are included.
But those things are not the real reason I'm emailing today. It is because, this year, I noticed a marked absence of free software talks and programs. The FOSS Mentoring program, which was a step in the right direction, remained (though, I think, was added very late). Many other, new programs were added that represent the Open Source ideals. There are also new programs that represent the Linux community. There were presentations on nonfree cloud services (in fact, the Saturday keynote focused on one). There were several presentations on Oracle projects, which cannot be in *perfect* keeping with Free Software ideals. In fact, the only other example of a Free Software presentation I can see is Tom Callaway's, for which I commend him.
This brings me to a question: Is the Free Software community so diminutive that no speakers wanted to address them? Or is this a preference of the SCaLE planners that is manifesting in policy? Another question: Is it wise, given this conference's need for attendees, to systematically exclude any community that would otherwise want to attend? I hope to discuss this further upon replies.
I, for one, refused to attend for those very reasons, so I hope that you will consider changing these policies, or maybe asking for term-agnostic presentations, before next year's conference. Thanks.
-- Mark Holmquist Student, Computer Science University of Redlands MarkTraceur@gmail.com
Scale-planning mailing list Scale-planning@lists.linuxfests.org https://lists.linuxfests.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scale-planning
Scale-planning mailing list Scale-planning@lists.linuxfests.org https://lists.linuxfests.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scale-planning
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 7:22 PM, Mark Holmquist marktraceur@gmail.com wrote:
[...] This brings me to a question: Is the Free Software community so diminutive that no speakers wanted to address them? Or is this a preference of the SCaLE planners that is manifesting in policy? Another question: Is it wise, given this conference's need for attendees, to systematically exclude any community that would otherwise want to attend? I hope to discuss this further upon replies.
I, for one, refused to attend for those very reasons, so I hope that you will consider changing these policies, or maybe asking for term-agnostic presentations, before next year's conference. Thanks.
Mark, if you chose not to attend the conference because it didn't have the content you wanted in concentration, it seems to me that the principles of choice and marketplace were in operation here. This is why all conferences publish their schedules in advance. But I know you were disappointed and I'm sorry we missed you. I think you know that SCaLE does not have a policy of exclusion, but there certainly _is_ a policy that facilitates whatever communities may not have been fully represented in the body of talks: Those are the BoFs. And those are cost free because they are supported by everyone else. Next year I hope that you come and run a BoF that promotes those critical, overlooked activities in your community. I want to be around passionate people who work hard contributing to open source efforts, so please shoot me an email, and I'll join you in the front row. With cookies.
...lori
[T]here certainly _is_ a policy that facilitates whatever communities may not have been fully represented in the body of talks: Those are the BoFs.
Lori, I would argue that those don't make up for the main body of presentations being inundated with talks that focus only on one community--not having a policy of exclusion doesn't necessarily mean that exclusion is not happening de facto. I don't expect you all to solve this problem, but I think (and maybe you can agree) that it is worth discussing. Also, I'd suggest reading the other messages in this thread, I came much closer to properly stating my intentions there.
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 10:15 PM, Mark Holmquist marktraceur@gmail.com wrote:
[...] I don't expect you all to solve this problem, but I think (and maybe you can agree) that it is worth discussing. Also, I'd suggest reading the other messages in this thread, I came much closer to properly stating my intentions there.
i just did, found the rest of the thread clarifying, and even more than before hope you come next year.
...lori
scale-planning@lists.linuxfests.org
-
Larry Cafiero -
Lei Zhang -
Lori Barfield -
Mark Holmquist -
Michael Proctor-Smith -
Phil Dibowitz -
Russell Miller -
Steve M Bibayoff -
Wayne