[fosscomm] Covering letter to FOSSCOMM position - for comments
jtd at mtnl.net.in
Tue Jul 14 23:51:45 PDT 2009
On Wednesday 15 July 2009, Nagarjuna G. wrote:
> On Wednesday 15 Jul 2009 9:21:12 am vid wrote:
> > On Sun, Jul 12, 2009 at 19:30, Kishore
> Bhargava<kishore at linkaxis.com> wrote:
> > > In fact, I think we should do a membership drive for
> > > organisations. I am assuming that FOSSCOMM will only be a
> > > network or group of FOSS organisations and not individuals.
> > This is sad. I am disappointed to see that fosscomm intends to be
> > a network of flossy-organisation's-only. It was decided earlier
> > that individuals would be a part of fosscomm, so I am surprised to
> > see a suggestion that keeps individuals out.
> > /me is catching still up on list mails and am not sure if this is
> > point is what prompted another mail on individuals which I had
> > read earlier.
> I don't think this issue is discussed, except Kishore's assumption
> above. Indeed KG did sign as an individual in the recent
> representation. So, there is no attempt to exclude individuals, and
> couldn't foresee any reason why people would support such move.
Infact I see individual memberships and activism as far more important than
I also dont see how one could prevent contrary opinions emanating from
During the Mumbai meet on the draft patent manual, someone from IBM (afair)
had proposed this gem. "We strongly oppose patents but have no problems with
As a result placing restrictive norms on organisation membership is likely to
be more than useless. Who is going to do the vetting?
One could ofcourse follow the elitist club method and admit members only by
invitation and approval of other members, and face the certain prospect of
being an elitist exclusionist club.
More information about the network