RE: Discussing issues

"Rich Murphey" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Then perhaps you can explain why you repeatedly focus on David
> Dawes personal finances and unemployment situation.  If you're going
> to separate the issues do so. As it is, you have repeatedly dragged
> David Dawes into the discussion of vested interests without any
> reason. 

Initially I dind't focus on David at all, but lumped him in with the 
group of XFree86 developers, simply stating that David just like everyone 
else is (or at least has in the past) been paid by commercial enterprises 
to work on XFree86. Since many have harped on the issue of 'vested 
interests' taking over and controlling XFree86, I was simply trying to 
point out that everyone has a vested interest in XFree86, many of them 
commercial vested interests.

The fact that David has been singled out is simply because some people 
took offense at the fact that I had lumped David in with 'the rest', and 
the discussion rolled on from there. In fact you yourself accused me of 
trying to cast David as being in the same situation as myself, which is 
something I never said.

> At this point I must ask, what is your motivation for denigrating
> David Dawes reputation or for assigning tungsten graphics undue
> influence on decision-making within XFree86? 

Who said I was trying to denigrate David Dawes reputation!? Like I have 
said before, I don't think there is anything wrong with David getting 
paid to work on XFree86 at all. All I am trying to say is that people 
should stop believing that the leaders of XFree86 have absolutely zero 
vested interests in XFree86. Everyone does; you just need to realise that 
having a vested interest is not like having the plague and XFree86 can 
work (and in fact has worked) with all the vested interests getting 
along.

In retrospect though I guess if you consider a commercial vested interest 
a terrible thing, then you might consider my statements as being aimed at 
denigrating David Dawes. Unfortunately I can't do much about your own 
personal beliefs now can I?

Anyway this discussion is just going around and around and I don't think 
we are going to reach a consensus anytime soon. Rather than wasting more 
bandwidth on this issue, I think it would be prudent at this point to 
simply agree to disagree and call it quits.

Regards,

---
Kendall Bennett
Chief Executive Officer
SciTech Software, Inc.
Phone: (530) 894 8400
http://www.scitechsoft.com

~ SciTech SNAP - The future of device driver technology! ~