OSDev.org

Also Kevin... Promoting free software is special treatment, once again the obvious points, most free software providing organisations are out to make money, if you promote them here, it is no different from spam. I have no problem with you promoting software if you believe it really needs you to (despite the fact they have marketing departemtns at all major FOSS corporations), go for it... just not here.

I can prove why not:

Take this phrase you used above, "Promoting free software is special treatment".

It is incorrect and here are two examples of why:
First Example - Specialization

• <software>.
• <pay to use closed source software>
  • 3dsmax
  • package z
  • package x
• <free open source software>
  • package a
  • gimp
  • package c
  • Firefox
  • package d
  • vim
  • blackbox
  • package d
• .... misc .. other tree entries

Now.
If <software> then special treatment to it and it's children
If <free open source software> then special treatment to it and it's children.
If blackbox then special treatment to it and it's children.

You should be able to notice that there is a scope structure above. If that scope structure did not exist you might interpret me saying I like apples as I like peaches and oranges too.

Now watch this:
"Promoting free software is special treatment"
Do you have a obligation with ALL THE FREE SOFTWARE in the world?

I know. I know. It sounds like I am just playing games and wasting time. But honestly you could have phrased it such as:
Promoting free software packages that you use is special treatment?

See the difference in meaning. The reason I say so is because of the next section.

--
I do not. I imagine you do not. You do not use all free software packages in the entire world and I do not either. Now with out this second part you will not understand what my point is so let me put it in here as a quote.
The Obligation
You go back and find this post it should be on page 3.

Kevin McGuire wrote: A Obligation
I think that if I use some software that is free then I have a obligation to help the organization that covers this software by:

• Promoting the software.
• Filing bug reports.
• Testing the software.

Guess what? I feel I have a obligation to do these things. I am going to offer my gratitude back to them. It is not special treatment because:
I am paying a dept.
I am paying what I owe.
I am fulfilling my obligation.

When I buy a software package in the store am I giving them special treatment? No. Since I have only one kind of treatment to give. It is to pay for the product. Take for example:

• Product A From Company B Costs $99.99
• Product C From Company D Costs $69.99

If I pay $99.99 for A and $69.99 for C have I given special treatment? No.
If I pay $69.99 and mail in a extra $10.00 then, Yes.

So going back to the scope. I am paying for what I use which is a standard treatment, not a special treatment.

You could copy some software that wants you to pay for it. In this case there is no forcing of paying the dept. It is just a assumed obligation that is morally correct even if you disagree with the fact that it costs money. And yes legal repercussions do exist, but so do <not specialized legal> repercussions for not fulfilling a obligation to ""free and open source software"".

http://www.osdev.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=14075
After reading a post by Solar in another thread we could even break the scope into. (software(free)(open source)(free and open source)).

Free
Free could have a lot of meaning in different circumstances, but to me it means something that has not any direct repercussions on myself if I do nothing but what was entitled to be free. I think free is really saying we are not going to place any repercussions on you for not doing something equivalent for us therefore it is free in this sense.

If my father gives me something for free. Do I not try give him something back when I am able and it is appropriate? Or do I just forget about it and continue on through life like it does not matter.

Support
After doing a little reading I remembered that support for FOSS is limited. It actually does not exist except by people whom want to give you a little of their time to help with a problem. However I still do not think this justifies there being no obligation instead I think it is just a external feature that did not have all the fancy little phone numbers included into the product.

Promoting
Maybe I could clarify this as if we start talking about multi deminsional warp engines and I have some FOSS software that computes the energy requirements of this device and I:

• I use this software.
• I like using this software.

Then I should tell you about it so as though you might contribute back to the FOSS project -- instead of keeping it a secret.

I am continuing the group/authors intentions as though they intended it to me when I downloaded the package. They intended people to use it. Therefore I wish to continue that as part of payment which is a obligation I feel is due if I am able to do so. If a forum was not receptive of promotion of something then I would not do it if I know the forum was not receptive of the promotion.

Of course this forum does not have a majority opinion made public so I therefore assume that it would be alright to promote something.

The forum does have a implied organization which states context relevance. So that something that is a irrelevant product promotion would be wrong and considered spam.

Spam
To send (a message) indiscriminately to multiple mailing lists, individuals, or newsgroups.

I do not see where anyone in this thread had send a message to multiple textual message mediums (mailing lists, individuals, or newsgroups).

The Obvious Points

1. Most free software providing organisations are out to make money
2. If you promote them here, it is no different from spam.
3. I have no problem with you promoting software if you believe it really needs you to.
4. Despite the fact they have marketing departemtns at all major FOSS corporations.
5. Just not here.

Well first off lets get rid of d since you say despite so it just holds a informative state instead of part of the actual argument.

Taking a look at a tells me that ... well nothing. Since it sounds like you are saying that I should just copy some software when it expects payment because the company is making money.

I have already talked about b (above).

For c I clarified (above) as I think you misunderstand me.

For e it seems invalid due to:

• a being informative.
• b being false.
• c being misunderstood.
• d being informative.

So I have to say your entire paragraph is just crap.

And honestly even if you did:

• <remove> Promoting the software. <remove>
• Filing bug reports.
• Testing the software.

You still have two other valid items.

Your posts are long,
this topic is old.
These lists are not strong,
and they gather mold.

Altercations are dull.
No meaning, no rhyme.
With luck, without skull.
May we leave with chime?

Such a short poem,
maybe to end?
Without jeroboam?
With the amend.

Your remarks are stark,
The weather is dark,
You lost some change,
For most the game,
Now you wanna blame,
Oh boy what a shame,
Your day is pain,
You wanna whine,
But I am going to dine,
Vain is not sane,
So stay in frame,
...
Since your really just a big pain.

My poem was well,
it told of no hell.
To end without spite,
was only my plight.

Kevin McGuire wrote:I can prove why not.

Its not really a prove/disprove issue... if you allow promotion of free software but not payed license software, you are giving preferential (special) treatment to the free software despite the fact it is nothing special. Sorry i wrote it like it was a debatable issue and not fact. It is fact.

Tyler wrote:

Kevin McGuire wrote:I can prove why not.

Its not really a prove/disprove issue... if you allow promotion of free software but not payed license software, you are giving preferential (special) treatment to the free software despite the fact it is nothing special. Sorry i wrote it like it was a debatable issue and not fact. It is fact.

Well... I got the answer. I found it here.

Too true... luckily most people here (You and I excluded) are not up their own arses far enough to consider their talking being a promotion or anything more than a simple comment. So wording it with the term promotional and not clarifying it really won't do any damage.

http://www.osdev.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.p ... ght=#96213

Alboin wrote:My poem was well,
it told of no hell.
To end without spite,
was only my plight.

Guys, end the feud.

Candy wrote:

Alboin wrote:My poem was well,
it told of no hell.
To end without spite,
was only my plight.

Guys, end the feud.

Hey! You interpreted it right! (Not much to interpret, but no one else seemed to get it.)

The point was to..uh...end the feud.

Too many rhymes!

Just switched to Firefox, found out that IE is actually slow, period. I thought it was just my internet connection

I noticed because the forum pages didn't take 10 seconds to load

</bringing back the biff>

pcmattman wrote:I noticed because the forum pages didn't take 10 seconds to load

I noticed that too. One of the reasons is that on using the forward and back buttons, IE seems to refresh the page whereas FF doesn't. This means that in FF, if you are using the 'View Unread Posts' option, the list does not update each time you read a post then click 'back'.

AJ wrote:

pcmattman wrote:I noticed because the forum pages didn't take 10 seconds to load

I noticed that too. One of the reasons is that on using the forward and back buttons, IE seems to refresh the page whereas FF doesn't. This means that in FF, if you are using the 'View Unread Posts' option, the list does not update each time you read a post then click 'back'.

It also uses a hell of a lot of memory, so you can turn it off or limit the number of stores. Always nice when you just want to quickly reread something then go forward again.