On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 10:56 AM, <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:achu.kulangara@gmail.com">achu.kulangara@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;">
I did not see any protest against these links so far. That is why I feel protests at NFM2008 at CUSAT was a public stunt aimed to tarnish its organisers. </blockquote><div><br>Ok. [Sorry Anil, for that abrupt reply - mirroring was being initiated, and is underway - I'm back.] <br>
<br>I think we need to remove all prejudices before we discuss on such matters. Anyone could have been in any roles, so let us try and see things from as many angles and resolve to eliminate such hurdles in future.<br><br>
Here FSF-I's campaign is completely known to the donors - its objectives and goals as well as the means of achieving them. By receiving donations, FSF-I doesn't dilute any of its stand on these objectives or goals or means - they all remain the same. Unlike a political organisation taking bribe and diluting its political objectives or resolving to remain a passive onlooker to destruction, there is no such commitment made by FSF or its other agencies here. There's also no message distributed downstream to the defenders of freedom to dilute or alter their stand on matters concerning such rights - no such call of discipline or ousting from organisational work here. In such a situation, a parallel cannot be drawn.<br>
<br>The actions at CUSAT however could be possibly because of the unawareness of the situation by certain section of novice organisers who may not have any clue about Novell's design and objectives. But the omission that has been made is allowing Novell to continue with its propaganda which is against the slated mission of the Conference, which was on Free Software, not against its principles. Here, we need to agree that ethics had been compromised.<br>
<br>Regards,<br>CK Raju<br><br></div></div><br>