Re: [Fsuk-manchester] Talking about non-free software on the list

[Bob Ham]

On 2013-03-17 18:28, MJ Ray wrote:

> If the instructions did not
> exist, there's a chance that someone who does it will write and
> publish instructions which probably won't mention the dangers of
> following them

In my opinion, the damage done by Debian's inclusion of instructions 
would be much greater than any damage done by some third party's 
omission of warnings.

Providing instructions with a warning that to follow the instructions 
is bad, gives a conflicting message.  The inclusion of any instuctions 
at all implies that following them is OK.  The words against following 
them come as an after-thought and, in opinion, with less power.

The omission of warnings by a third party is only hypothesised.  The 
damage done by Debian's inclusion of instructions is actually happening 
now.


> At least if we write the instructions, we can include an explaination
> why installing non-free software is a temporary sticking-plaster

If that's the kind of distribution you want to create, that's your 
prerogative.  But that isn't the kind of distribution I, and others, 
want to use.  And it isn't a distribution that abides by the FSF 
Guidelines.


--
Bob Ham <address@hidden>

for (;;) { ++pancakes; }