Peter Gerwinski wrote:
It is important that everyone is heared and can contribute, but we must be very careful with this. There are far more promoters of "Open Source" around (or of proprietary software, for that matter) than people who have really understood Free Software. When it comes to elections - who do you think will get more popularity?
I think we need to come up with a simple, concise (one or two sentence) explanation of Free Software that a layperson can understand. If someone asks me "What is Free Software?", I don't want to have to launch into an explanation of technical details (remember, many people are not even aware of what "source code" means). Try as I might, I can't come up with an explanaiton of this kind. Can anyone else?
And of course you'd want to know us better in order to learn who of us is qualified for a certain job.
Exactly. As Georg wrote, we want to build the mutual trust that is neccessary for such a big project.
I'd like to propose that all major decisions (like what our policy is on a new issue) are put to the discussion list before becoming official- that way we can have a transparent debate.
(Yes, I am paranoid. But am I paranoid enough? <umguck> ;-)
"Just because you're paranoid, don't mean they're not after you"-- Nirvana
The Illuminatus are everywhere, my friend. <g>