RE: Re: Suggestion for XFree86

Sven's absolutely dead right on this one.  It's what killed X the first
time.
The X consortium made it whore to whoever paid dues and kept it hostage in
their
prison.  It was 1992 and they still had no PC support.  That's rather
indefensible and shows
what 'vested' interests can do.

And when are they gonna get rid of that SI and go XFree86?  The 2nd
millenium
has come and gone, I guess we're waiting for the next?

Georgina




Nothing is really work unless you would rather be doing something else.

James Barrie, author of Peter Pan.



*  *-----Original Message-----
*  *From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]On Behalf
*  *Of Sven Luther
*  *Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2003 2:50 PM
*  *To: [email protected]
*  *Subject: Re: [forum] Re: Suggestion for XFree86
*  *
*  *
*  *On Thu, Mar 20, 2003 at 12:29:14PM -0800, Frank LaMonica wrote:
*  *> I'd like to answer a couple of comments to my post:
*  *>
*  *> Sven,
*  *> I agree there is a possibility some people could join XFree86
*  *just for what
*  *> they my sickly view as "the fun of disrupting the
*  *organization", but that
*  *
*  *Or for other more intentional reasons.
*  *
*  *> fringe element could not gain enough support from the group
*  *to effect any
*  *> important issue that was up for a vote.  It doesn't make
*  *sense to me to
*  *
*  *Why should it be a fringe elements, imagine huge hords of slashdot
*  *readers, with nothing else to do with their time than get involved in
*  *huge flamewars, joining xfree86, and because they are numerous get the
*  *higher hand with the votes.
*  *
*  *> eliminate the opportunity for so many very interested, and very
*  *> knowledgeable XFree86 users to participate equally in the
*  *organization *by
*  *> their vote* just because a small minority of people who may
*  *not be qualified
*  *
*  *The thing is, i don't believe it will forever remain a small minority,
*  *it could well happen, for intentional reasons or others, that they
*  *become the huge majority and that the developpers become the small
*  *minority.
*  *
*  *> are also allowed to vote.  I say *by their vote* because the
*  *control of the
*  *> organization, its policies, its strategic direction, and its
*  *procedures and
*  *> processes would remain with the BOD and with the officers it elects.
*  *
*  *Which would be elected by an uncontrolable amount of voters, no ?
*  *
*  *And that doesn't include an intentional attempt of hostile takeover or
*  *something such.
*  *
*  *Friendly,
*  *
*  *Sven Luther

*  *http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/forum