On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 7:56 AM, Roshan Phillip <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:roshan.phillip@gmail.com" target="_blank">roshan.phillip@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Moreover, an organization cannot work in isolation. Kiran's close<br>
connections with the Communist Party can be and should be used for the</blockquote><br>Activists of left organisations have real work at hand which could include <br>(a) doing an internal audit of all the work at hand in assessing existence of proprietary solutions and standards in governance mechanisms and making the bureaucracy to come out with firm migration plans, wherever Left enjoys power, <br>
(b) initiation of immediate efforts towards free software solutions - in places like Kerala and Bengal, for complete conversion (For instance, LSG department in Kerala still promotes and funds proprietary solutions from IKM, despite inviting CAG's adverse comments. Why not entrust the entire work with OSS which has sufficient proven capabilities in the same area?), <br>
(c) wherever credible presence is claimed, initiation of work with school curriculum taking help and expertise from Kerala's teachers association, <br>(d) training of all supporters to work and promote for Free Software and Open standards. <br>
<br>Why should any organisation feel FSF-I is standing in the way for achieving such goals ? On the contrary, without having any such credible action-programmes declared within own government, even when there are evidences of collusion with proprietary solutions, such claims or references to lead campaigns on behalf of FSF-I is definitely going to make FS community tense, if not jittery. Is this not the right approach, or are there better ways of achieving it ? <br>
<br>CK Raju<br><br><br><br></div>