Comments on: National Free Software Conference, Boycott Novell & Turn outs http://anivar.movingrepublic.org/2008/national-free-software-conference-boycott-novell-turn-outs ramblings of Anivar Aravind Fri, 25 Sep 2009 10:07:31 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 By: Madhu http://anivar.movingrepublic.org/2008/national-free-software-conference-boycott-novell-turn-outs/comment-page-1#comment-164 Madhu Tue, 09 Dec 2008 13:30:10 +0000 http://anivar.movingrepublic.org/?p=82#comment-164 This may be useful! http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-635735684063417950&ei=C3I-SY7GNoe0wgP93IR2&q=negri This may be useful!
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-635735684063417950&ei=C3I-SY7GNoe0wgP93IR2&q=negri

]]> By: Digital Freedom - The Boycott Story | raneez is writing http://anivar.movingrepublic.org/2008/national-free-software-conference-boycott-novell-turn-outs/comment-page-1#comment-157 Digital Freedom - The Boycott Story | raneez is writing Fri, 05 Dec 2008 10:37:22 +0000 http://anivar.movingrepublic.org/?p=82#comment-157 [...] to watch Movie -Anti trust (Its only a Story ). You can get more update from Anivar’s blog  about issue and pictures from Arky. I have also uploaded few photos of conference in my album [...] [...] to watch Movie -Anti trust (Its only a Story ). You can get more update from Anivar’s blog  about issue and pictures from Arky. I have also uploaded few photos of conference in my album [...]

]]> By: Madhu http://anivar.movingrepublic.org/2008/national-free-software-conference-boycott-novell-turn-outs/comment-page-1#comment-154 Madhu Wed, 26 Nov 2008 06:42:38 +0000 http://anivar.movingrepublic.org/?p=82#comment-154 Watching this video would prevent us from reinventing the wheel during the proposed debate: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6390784544771380326&ei=Zu8sSeTQH6Ky2gLwo4HEAw&q=richard+stallman Watching this video would prevent us from reinventing the wheel during the proposed debate:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6390784544771380326&ei=Zu8sSeTQH6Ky2gLwo4HEAw&q=richard+stallman

]]> By: Madhu http://anivar.movingrepublic.org/2008/national-free-software-conference-boycott-novell-turn-outs/comment-page-1#comment-152 Madhu Tue, 25 Nov 2008 21:28:59 +0000 http://anivar.movingrepublic.org/?p=82#comment-152 At least now there is a philosophical response. I am happy for that. Seeing the discussion becoming too much personal (mr.joseph vs. mr.arun) I wanted to get out of the discussion. Now there is some theoretical discussion. I think I should engage with this one. Let me introduce myself: I am an independent person. I do not belong to any movement. I do not belong to any party. However, I think about freedom. My thinking is neither Marxist nor capitalist. I do not think that there is only a Marxist vs capitalist argument exist in the world. There are immense possibility of thinking. I borrow ideas from every thoughts I feel relevant. If there is no tolerance towards such position debate may not be possible- is obstructs listening. About the world we are living in: I do not think we are living in the same world as that of the Marx. The nature of “products” and “services” are not same as that of the past. To be more elaborate we live in a world where a product once produced can be sold many times. Hence, it is not the thing that is visible but something else is sold. Things that are abstract and non-material is sold. “Selling” got redefined. Often we are not sold, we are licensed to use. The same product can be purchased by innumerable number of people at the same time- this does not put so much pressure on the producer. That is, the new economy is not a “scarcity economics” so that the ‘laws’ of supply and demand do not function as it was in the economy of scarcity. The nature of “property” got changed. Property is not just a piece of land or a machine alone, but it is something ‘immaterial’. It is intelligence. Intelligence is “less separable from its producer” as it was the case with the manual labour. Intelligence is a continuity of intelligent person more “non-alienable” than the other forms of “labour”. “owing” the labour by a price given to the time spent by the “intelligent” “software worker” or a “gene-worker” is not any way similar to owing a labour of a tailor. In the former case the owner owns too much. He owns a piece of intelligence!- which can be owned again and again. It can be sold or licensed again and again. Owing such a product does not mean owing an isolated product of labour, rather owing a cog in the wheel- an inevitable piece of information which is part of a stream of information and their future constructions. That is the owner can make too much of a claim for anything that uses this information. The labourer is too much constrained- “alienated” than before. He/She will not have the freedom to continue with his stream of thoughts once it is sold. The owner “licences” where as the worker “sells”. The worker sells at a point of time of his/her employment the “owner” sells for a longer period of time he/she licences/sells it where ever that intelligence- or code is used! The “use value” of the new labour is immense. It can be sold/licenced with no additional marginal cost for a longer period of time! The changes made by the labour is immense. (imagine the kind of difference a genetical code can make!) Ingredients used in making a final product if not transparent the possibility of “intelligence theft” is immense. Hence, the source code if kept secret, there can be theft. The thieves can steal anything that is available in the public domain and covert them private. Labour as a commodity does not remain same as it was in the case of classical political economy. Impacts are immense- too risky. Non-transparent private ownership of software and genetical codes may take away freedom from the human species forever! The new situation demands new definitions of freedom. There should be some agreement/ disagreement on the above said aspects before we proceed. It should be understood that my stand is not FSF stand. It should be recognized that I am not proposing a full fledged theory nor speaking from an established theoretical position. Since, the thinking are new if there is any set back in the arguments put, it should be seen as my personal failure and not the failure of any one arguing ideas similar to mine. As I have not yet come to any conclusion in my thinking I will be changing my position rather than committing to my earlier arguments in the due course. I am ready to take a debate with the already institutionalized positions you have taken. Since we are taking one to one argument both you and me should be having the right to choose selective ideas of the partners and friends who may join with us. Both of us will not be bound by the arguments put by our friends. That is to avoid confusions and side tracks. We should agree not to abuse each other. However, we are free to point out logical fallacies. Please join with me in agreeing and disagreeing with my stands above. Then we will have a coherent debate about other things- like “contradictions & conflicts exist in a capitalist society”- Let us not assume the words like contradiction, conflict capitalist society and others are taken for granted. Both of us should be responsible in explaining as clearly as possible at the convenience of the listener the terms used. However, we are free to change our position by clearly spelling the change in the due course of argument. You can also set the rule of the debate and alter some I have said. Let us start. At least now there is a philosophical response. I am happy for that.
Seeing the discussion becoming too much personal (mr.joseph vs. mr.arun) I wanted to get out of the discussion.
Now there is some theoretical discussion. I think I should engage with this one.
Let me introduce myself:
I am an independent person. I do not belong to any movement. I do not belong to any party. However, I think about freedom. My thinking is neither Marxist nor capitalist. I do not think that there is only a Marxist vs capitalist argument exist in the world. There are immense possibility of thinking. I borrow ideas from every thoughts I feel relevant. If there is no tolerance towards such position debate may not be possible- is obstructs listening.
About the world we are living in:
I do not think we are living in the same world as that of the Marx. The nature of “products” and “services” are not same as that of the past. To be more elaborate we live in a world where a product once produced can be sold many times. Hence, it is not the thing that is visible but something else is sold. Things that are abstract and non-material is sold. “Selling” got redefined. Often we are not sold, we are licensed to use. The same product can be purchased by innumerable number of people at the same time- this does not put so much pressure on the producer. That is, the new economy is not a “scarcity economics” so that the ‘laws’ of supply and demand do not function as it was in the economy of scarcity. The nature of “property” got changed. Property is not just a piece of land or a machine alone, but it is something ‘immaterial’. It is intelligence. Intelligence is “less separable from its producer” as it was the case with the manual labour. Intelligence is a continuity of intelligent person more “non-alienable” than the other forms of “labour”. “owing” the labour by a price given to the time spent by the “intelligent” “software worker” or a “gene-worker” is not any way similar to owing a labour of a tailor. In the former case the owner owns too much. He owns a piece of intelligence!- which can be owned again and again. It can be sold or licensed again and again. Owing such a product does not mean owing an isolated product of labour, rather owing a cog in the wheel- an inevitable piece of information which is part of a stream of information and their future constructions. That is the owner can make too much of a claim for anything that uses this information. The labourer is too much constrained- “alienated” than before. He/She will not have the freedom to continue with his stream of thoughts once it is sold. The owner “licences” where as the worker “sells”. The worker sells at a point of time of his/her employment the “owner” sells for a longer period of time he/she licences/sells it where ever that intelligence- or code is used! The “use value” of the new labour is immense. It can be sold/licenced with no additional marginal cost for a longer period of time! The changes made by the labour is immense. (imagine the kind of difference a genetical code can make!) Ingredients used in making a final product if not transparent the possibility of “intelligence theft” is immense. Hence, the source code if kept secret, there can be theft. The thieves can steal anything that is available in the public domain and covert them private. Labour as a commodity does not remain same as it was in the case of classical political economy. Impacts are immense- too risky. Non-transparent private ownership of software and genetical codes may take away freedom from the human species forever! The new situation demands new definitions of freedom.
There should be some agreement/ disagreement on the above said aspects before we proceed. It should be understood that my stand is not FSF stand. It should be recognized that I am not proposing a full fledged theory nor speaking from an established theoretical position. Since, the thinking are new if there is any set back in the arguments put, it should be seen as my personal failure and not the failure of any one arguing ideas similar to mine. As I have not yet come to any conclusion in my thinking I will be changing my position rather than committing to my earlier arguments in the due course. I am ready to take a debate with the already institutionalized positions you have taken.
Since we are taking one to one argument both you and me should be having the right to choose selective ideas of the partners and friends who may join with us. Both of us will not be bound by the arguments put by our friends. That is to avoid confusions and side tracks.
We should agree not to abuse each other. However, we are free to point out logical fallacies.
Please join with me in agreeing and disagreeing with my stands above. Then we will have a coherent debate about other things- like “contradictions & conflicts exist in a capitalist society”- Let us not assume the words like contradiction, conflict capitalist society and others are taken for granted. Both of us should be responsible in explaining as clearly as possible at the convenience of the listener the terms used. However, we are free to change our position by clearly spelling the change in the due course of argument.
You can also set the rule of the debate and alter some I have said.
Let us start.

]]> By: Das http://anivar.movingrepublic.org/2008/national-free-software-conference-boycott-novell-turn-outs/comment-page-1#comment-151 Das Tue, 25 Nov 2008 12:03:08 +0000 http://anivar.movingrepublic.org/?p=82#comment-151 The issue of software freedom or freedom of knowledge is only one of the very many contradictions and conflicts that exist in a capitalist society. The root cause of this conflict is the capitalist system as such as IPR can be seen as only another form of private ownership in a world where digital commodities are produced and sold (This premise can be debated if needed). Having said so what is now required on the part of the Free Software Movement is the extending out to all forms of struggles in the society. For this it has to reach out to various sections of the society and not get confined to free software enthusiasts alone. The major contribution of the National Conference 2008 was that it could reach out to various sections of the society with the theme of free knowledge and free software. The organisers can come out with details of the participation from various cross sections of the society if possible on the website. FSF is now seeing things in a narrow perpective and hence its activists are getting over excited about trivial happenings like Novell putting up a stall in the exhibition. I fear that the agenda and activity domain of FSF has become so narrow that the actions by the activists are taking the form of intolerance as well. Also just look at the statement of RMS saying that Anvar is the first person in the world to be mishandled for having undertaken a free software cause. RMS may be communicated that the person who posts this has been mishandled by students way back in 1998 when he was undertaking a project study in favour of free software. This was before the FSFI chapter started operation in India. Thre is a report submitted to Ernakulam District Administration that FS should be the technology in e-governance for panchayath computerisation. This oversight too is because of the narrow mindedness in agenda and programme. Free software movement can become a peoples movement only if it integrates itself with movements (even those movements which are taking place in the corporate world and hence I feel Novell or any such corporate also has a role to play). FSF may please understand that the free software movement is not about yourself. It is a broader peoples movement (started in India even before FSFI chapter was inaugurated) FSF may please understand that if it does not extend out to other movements and conferences of similar kind and creatively take part in these with perseverance and tolerance, it will be confined to history in quick time (at least in India) however big the personalities involved are. The issue of software freedom or freedom of knowledge is only one of the very many contradictions and conflicts that exist in a capitalist society. The root cause of this conflict is the capitalist system as such as IPR can be seen as only another form of private ownership in a world where digital commodities are produced and sold (This premise can be debated if needed). Having said so what is now required on the part of the Free Software Movement is the extending out to all forms of struggles in the society. For this it has to reach out to various sections of the society and not get confined to free software enthusiasts alone. The major contribution of the National Conference 2008 was that it could reach out to various sections of the society with the theme of free knowledge and free software. The organisers can come out with details of the participation from various cross sections of the society if possible on the website. FSF is now seeing things in a narrow perpective and hence its activists are getting over excited about trivial happenings like Novell putting up a stall in the exhibition. I fear that the agenda and activity domain of FSF has become so narrow that the actions by the activists are taking the form of intolerance as well. Also just look at the statement of RMS saying that Anvar is the first person in the world to be mishandled for having undertaken a free software cause. RMS may be communicated that the person who posts this has been mishandled by students way back in 1998 when he was undertaking a project study in favour of free software. This was before the FSFI chapter started operation in India. Thre is a report submitted to Ernakulam District Administration that FS should be the technology in e-governance for panchayath computerisation. This oversight too is because of the narrow mindedness in agenda and programme.
Free software movement can become a peoples movement only if it integrates itself with movements (even those movements which are taking place in the corporate world and hence I feel Novell or any such corporate also has a role to play).
FSF may please understand that the free software movement is not about yourself. It is a broader peoples movement (started in India even before FSFI chapter was inaugurated)
FSF may please understand that if it does not extend out to other movements and conferences of similar kind and creatively take part in these with perseverance and tolerance, it will be confined to history in quick time (at least in India) however big the personalities involved are.

]]> By: CK Raju http://anivar.movingrepublic.org/2008/national-free-software-conference-boycott-novell-turn-outs/comment-page-1#comment-150 CK Raju Tue, 25 Nov 2008 04:20:06 +0000 http://anivar.movingrepublic.org/?p=82#comment-150 And look Madhu as to what triggered the episode. A mere suspicion - somebody behind some propaganda - are these party supporters more vulnerable than religious supporters - to get emotionally carried away just because some monkey faces are shown at them. Is this the mandate given by people to be adhered to in these 5 years ? When poor people are suffering like hell, a few are enjoying the thrill - like participating in some weird adventure - is it healthy for a democracy ? FS movements have been vehemently criticised by monopolists, abused by some, its supporters taken to court, but did this movement or its supporters get carried away ? These incidents have only made them more resolute, more responsive and more focussed. Anivar and his team has contributed a lot that makes Free Software enjoyable by a majority of the poor people of our state - more than what any government had done for the discipline - they deserve extreme commendation - and look what we all are offering in return - humiliation and disrespect. Is this the way our civilisation has to grow - do we allow our future generations also to follow the path that we chose to ? We should immediately give up all our personal differences aside when we discuss common issues. If young blood want to hit and enjoy, hit someone amongst us and take pleasure. I promise, neither Madhu nor I would hit back. Lets move on. And look Madhu as to what triggered the episode. A mere suspicion – somebody behind some propaganda – are these party supporters more vulnerable than religious supporters – to get emotionally carried away just because some monkey faces are shown at them. Is this the mandate given by people to be adhered to in these 5 years ? When poor people are suffering like hell, a few are enjoying the thrill – like participating in some weird adventure – is it healthy for a democracy ? FS movements have been vehemently criticised by monopolists, abused by some, its supporters taken to court, but did this movement or its supporters get carried away ? These incidents have only made them more resolute, more responsive and more focussed. Anivar and his team has contributed a lot that makes Free Software enjoyable by a majority of the poor people of our state – more than what any government had done for the discipline – they deserve extreme commendation – and look what we all are offering in return – humiliation and disrespect. Is this the way our civilisation has to grow – do we allow our future generations also to follow the path that we chose to ? We should immediately give up all our personal differences aside when we discuss common issues. If young blood want to hit and enjoy, hit someone amongst us and take pleasure. I promise, neither Madhu nor I would hit back. Lets move on.

]]> By: Joseph Thomas http://anivar.movingrepublic.org/2008/national-free-software-conference-boycott-novell-turn-outs/comment-page-1#comment-149 Joseph Thomas Tue, 25 Nov 2008 04:10:06 +0000 http://anivar.movingrepublic.org/?p=82#comment-149 My point is very plain. 1. I am not arguing for NOVELL's freedom. 2. I am arguing for the freedom of the organisers and the responsibility on the part of the organisers to protect the contract with NOVELL while accepting the sponsorship. 3. I am pointing out the anti-democratic attitude crept in the actions of Anivar, may be due to the over enthusiasm. But for the untoward incident happened inside the exhibition hall and pasting of "BOYCOTT NOVEL" posters on the posters of others, the protest is well within the norms and justified. I too could have argued for Anivar. 4. I have never argued that NOVELL is correct or NOVELL is justified in any of their action. In fact I had no previous occassion to assess NOVELL. From what I could gather now, I too dont support NOVELL. Hereafter, I too wont agree to bring NOVELL as a sponsor. 5. What I am pointing out is a pre-planned attack on the organisers of CUSAT national conference on software freedom triggered by FSFI, supported and taken up by Anivar and friends. 6. Campaign against the naming of the conference as 2nd to Hyderabad, initiated by Sri. M Arun of FSFI, claiming that the Hyderabad conference was organised by FSFI. 7. Anivar took it up and that campaign reached a stage where Anivar was disassociating with the program committee. 8. That was some how averted by the organising committee by not insisting on the name to satisfy the critics. Organising committee thought it fit to avoid a division on such issue as the name, fact remaining what it is. 9. Then came, the question of funds. Even on 14th, the organising committee didnot get firm offer for the required funds. NOVELL's proposal was brought somewhere around the 1st week of November and couldnot be processed or finalised till 14th. Same was the case with almost all the other sponsors like, CDiT, ITMission etc. Their sponsorships also were put up on the site only on 12th and 13th. CDiT, ITMission etc were not insisting on any conditions like calling Platinum or Gold. Here the proposal itself was like Platinum sponsor etc. Out of compulsion on 14th evening, the organisers agreed to the sponsorship of NOVELL and the stage backdrop was prepared accordingly and NOVELL's representative was included in the inaugural session. This is the reason why NOVELL's sponsorship did not appear in the site. There was no effort on the part of organisers to keep it secret fron any body. 10. The organisers have send proposal to almost all the Free Software Business groups for sponsorships. But none came forward, may be due to the campaign undertaken by FSFI against this conference, I presume. 11. Nobody from FSF thought that this conference would be a success to this extend. 12. Sri. Sasikumar has turned down the invitation as a speaker saying that he got a pre-planned program at Palghat. But he too was seen in the conference, thanks to him. 12. Thanks to Sri. Nagarjun, chairman of FSFI who readily agreed for blessing this event not only by his speach we requested for but also offering a workshop. I am sorry, that we couldnot meet his full expenditure due to shortage of funds. Thanks to him. 13. To me, Sri. Arun was inclined to claim the credit for every free software activity or event in India. He feels that free software activity shall take place only under the FSFI. This seems to be the notion of Anivar and group also with the addition of SMC to the FSFI. 14. We in Kochi, OSS ICS LTD & ATPS, have never been a part of FSFI. Some of us were co-operating with the SMC initiatives for Malayalam localisation. 15. Sri. Arun M, himself created hurdles for releasing the funds from IT Mission, which is quite unbecoming of a public servant who has to be impartial. 14. The free software promotional activities of Kerala State IT Mission during the past have been limited to promoting SPACE and on its counselling planning and holding International Events and international institutions at Trivandrum, while what is needed to be addressed was local empowerment. 15. Sri Arun on behalf of FSFI and Sri. Anivar has been engaging themselves in a crusade against CPI(M). Sri. Arun was not so open as Anivar. This is revealed in the case of the campaign against : The chennai conference organised by those in chennai, may be supporters of CPI(M). This is the reason why I asked Sri. Arun reply to my questions on his activities. I hope I am justified in asking these questions here since Sri. Arun responded here in this site. If you are not tolerant, I too stop my comments on this site Gd bi. My point is very plain.

1. I am not arguing for NOVELL’s freedom.

2. I am arguing for the freedom of the organisers and the responsibility on the part of the organisers to protect the contract with NOVELL while accepting the sponsorship.

3. I am pointing out the anti-democratic attitude crept in the actions of Anivar, may be due to the over enthusiasm. But for the untoward incident happened inside the exhibition hall and pasting of “BOYCOTT NOVEL” posters on the posters of others, the protest is well within the norms and justified. I too could have argued for Anivar.

4. I have never argued that NOVELL is correct or NOVELL is justified in any of their action. In fact I had no previous occassion to assess NOVELL. From what I could gather now, I too dont support NOVELL. Hereafter, I too wont agree to bring NOVELL as a sponsor.

5. What I am pointing out is a pre-planned attack on the organisers of CUSAT national conference on software freedom triggered by FSFI, supported and taken up by Anivar and friends.

6. Campaign against the naming of the conference as 2nd to Hyderabad, initiated by Sri. M Arun of FSFI, claiming that the Hyderabad conference was organised by FSFI.

7. Anivar took it up and that campaign reached a stage where Anivar was disassociating with the program committee.

8. That was some how averted by the organising committee by not insisting on the name to satisfy the critics. Organising committee thought it fit to avoid a division on such issue as the name, fact remaining what it is.

9. Then came, the question of funds. Even on 14th, the organising committee didnot get firm offer for the required funds. NOVELL’s proposal was brought somewhere around the 1st week of November and couldnot be processed or finalised till 14th. Same was the case with almost all the other sponsors like, CDiT, ITMission etc. Their sponsorships also were put up on the site only on 12th and 13th. CDiT, ITMission etc were not insisting on any conditions like calling Platinum or Gold. Here the proposal itself was like Platinum sponsor etc. Out of compulsion on 14th evening, the organisers agreed to the sponsorship of NOVELL and the stage backdrop was prepared accordingly and NOVELL’s representative was included in the inaugural session. This is the reason why NOVELL’s sponsorship did not appear in the site. There was no effort on the part of organisers to keep it secret fron any body.

10. The organisers have send proposal to almost all the Free Software Business groups for sponsorships. But none came forward, may be due to the campaign undertaken by FSFI against this conference, I presume.

11. Nobody from FSF thought that this conference would be a success to this extend.

12. Sri. Sasikumar has turned down the invitation as a speaker saying that he got a pre-planned program at Palghat. But he too was seen in the conference, thanks to him.

12. Thanks to Sri. Nagarjun, chairman of FSFI who readily agreed for blessing this event not only by his speach we requested for but also offering a workshop. I am sorry, that we couldnot meet his full expenditure due to shortage of funds. Thanks to him.

13. To me, Sri. Arun was inclined to claim the credit for every free software activity or event in India. He feels that free software activity shall take place only under the FSFI. This seems to be the notion of Anivar and group also with the addition of SMC to the FSFI.

14. We in Kochi, OSS ICS LTD & ATPS, have never been a part of FSFI. Some of us were co-operating with the SMC initiatives for Malayalam localisation.

15. Sri. Arun M, himself created hurdles for releasing the funds from IT Mission, which is quite unbecoming of a public servant who has to be impartial.

14. The free software promotional activities of Kerala State IT Mission during the past have been limited to promoting SPACE and on its counselling planning and holding International Events and international institutions at Trivandrum, while what is needed to be addressed was local empowerment.

15. Sri Arun on behalf of FSFI and Sri. Anivar has been engaging themselves in a crusade against CPI(M). Sri. Arun was not so open as Anivar. This is revealed in the case of the campaign against :

The chennai conference organised by those in chennai, may be supporters of CPI(M).

This is the reason why I asked Sri. Arun reply to my questions on his activities. I hope I am justified in asking these questions here since Sri. Arun responded here in this site.

If you are not tolerant, I too stop my comments on this site

Gd bi.

]]> By: Madhu http://anivar.movingrepublic.org/2008/national-free-software-conference-boycott-novell-turn-outs/comment-page-1#comment-148 Madhu Mon, 24 Nov 2008 16:12:31 +0000 http://anivar.movingrepublic.org/?p=82#comment-148 I wanted to stop. One more word. I happened to read this one: http://mm.gnu.org.in/pipermail/fsf-friends/2003-January/000595.html http://mm.gnu.org.in/pipermail/fsf-friends/2003-January/000621.html RMS words are repeated to justify some business deal and its refusal. Such a word game often goes against the spirit. We have witnessed with all the declines of movements: marxism, buddhism, christianity, islam... When decline starts the followers of movements take the words of its leaders literally and go against its spirit. Such an action is done because one compulsively force oneself into an ideology whose spirit one does not understand. It also happens when one pretends as if one's action is in compliance with a philosophy. Such pretension and uncritical followership is dangerous and degenerative. Movements should constantly be in vigil from such a degeneration. Compassion and irreducible responsibility should come before ideology. Lush ever green Forests when they are in decline there exists some symptoms.... some species of monkeys appear... Understandings when become ideologies they are such monkeys. They indicate degeneration. I was very much hopeful of the FSF. Is it degenerating? A second thought! I wanted to stop. One more word.
I happened to read this one:
http://mm.gnu.org.in/pipermail/fsf-friends/2003-January/000595.html
http://mm.gnu.org.in/pipermail/fsf-friends/2003-January/000621.html
RMS words are repeated to justify some business deal and its refusal.
Such a word game often goes against the spirit. We have witnessed with all the declines of movements: marxism, buddhism, christianity, islam…
When decline starts the followers of movements take the words of its leaders literally and go against its spirit.
Such an action is done because one compulsively force oneself into an ideology whose spirit one does not understand. It also happens when one pretends as if one’s action is in compliance with a philosophy.
Such pretension and uncritical followership is dangerous and degenerative.
Movements should constantly be in vigil from such a degeneration.
Compassion and irreducible responsibility should come before ideology.
Lush ever green Forests when they are in decline there exists some symptoms…. some species of monkeys appear… Understandings when become ideologies they are such monkeys. They indicate degeneration.
I was very much hopeful of the FSF.
Is it degenerating?
A second thought!

]]> By: Madhu http://anivar.movingrepublic.org/2008/national-free-software-conference-boycott-novell-turn-outs/comment-page-1#comment-147 Madhu Mon, 24 Nov 2008 14:23:05 +0000 http://anivar.movingrepublic.org/?p=82#comment-147 Mr. Joseph Thomas, This will be my last post here. I understand that the venue of Free Software is used by a few for personal feud. Your concern for Novell's freedom is misplaced. What novell did is a sabotage. What the cusat people did is stupid. It seems you were cashing out of this incident by joining with the ignorant cusat people, who by now could have understood their grievous mistake. Novell is not arguing against their mis-treatment, CUSAT people are silent. Then why you are so much vocal for Novell? It appears CPM also is not supporting the Novell mess.I do not think such a sponsoring will be preferred in Kerala in future. As far as such a realization happening, the protest my Aniver and his friends really brought some fruitful awareness. I have not seen any serious allegation by you against aniver by you as it appears something to do with your attitude towards them seen together. Your target seems to be Mr.Arun. I do not know both of you. But I regret your personal feud pushed you to such an extent to extend your olive branch to the enemy of your hate character. Enemy of your enemy temporarily became your friend. But, your presentation of your attitude was deceptive. You were talking about the freedom of novell. I do not think that was your real concern. Even if it were microsoft your attitude would have been the same- as you see only your enemy. That makes you myopic. I do not know Arun. Neither I support him. But you were inviting comments by your provocative stand- which was insincere. Further, this should not have been selected as your place to fight your personal enemy what ever could have been the injustice committed against you. I desire he does not answer here. Such an answering and your counter accusations would make free software movement a laughing stock. That is very bad. Free Software Movement is not something to do with your personal feuds- especially that has nothing to do with its philosophy. As you have some other motive your idea of freedom has to be neglected. Yet, for the sake of students who visit this place I would like to comment on the notion of freedom you invoke. "Freedom" is not a private property. There is no your freedom and my freedom. Freedom is not a thing possessed. Freedom is a common field. It is an ecology. It is openness. It is resistance to dominance. It is being authentically human. I have written about freedom here in detail: http://www.scribd.com/doc/6332438/Madhusuicide-as-Unfreedom-and-Vice-Versa There is no such thing as Novell's freedom! There is no such thing as Aniver's freedom! All that matters is whether there is freedom, openness, resistance and authenticity! Freedom can be violated. Microsoft violates freedom. Novell violates freedom. That is it. There is no novell's freedom. It is absurd to say freedom is all about views and counter views and the patient listening of such views .... Freedom is freedom beyond what-so-ever our views are! In a world of unfreedom, only unfreedom will be peacefully continuing. Now genetic codes and lives are owned by corporates. Do you think it is their freedom to own them? Do you think they can be peacefully questioned? Che was fighting. Was he peacefully working for smooth conduct? what is that smoothly conducted? If it is unfreedom it has to be questioned. No body should be free to impose unfreedom. When somebody imposes unfreedom that process should not be let to be conducted smoothly. Mostly unfreedom is imposed in the most smooth way. That smoothness is deceptive. Glib talks and lovely imposition of unfreedom is called imposing unfreedom using bio-power. Bio-power operates through glib-talks attractive advertisements, sponsoring, social work, Aids prevention etc. Look at coco cola. Their campaign for clean water for poor is such a bio-power. democratic etiquettes will hardly helpful to take on them. These etiquites are our state of subjugation. That is the violence on our authenticity. That is silencing our critical capability. That is the unfreedom penetrated to the core of our bone marrows. The respect to CM or PM and who so ever has no meaning. Are you convent educated? The job one holds, its norms... etc. are bullshit. They do not appeal. They are not related to the idea of freedom as you portray them as if they were the test stones! They are something different. What is your problem with aniver's protest? If Arun has something to do with you in some other deal that is entirely different story. Bringing them here is meaning less. There is something hidden in your attitude towards aniver. I do not want to know that. But your opposition does not seem as plain as towards aniver not following norms of freedom! What you hide is not that much hidden. Why do you instruct what arun should do or not do? Who are you to do that? If he does something inappropriate his higher officials would manage him. What is your problem? CUSAT is not God! (Even God should not be beyond criticism!) Cusat is not beyond criticism. One has to be critical of the institutions- especially public institutions. They use public money. They have to be centers of excellence. When they are not they should be criticized. I do not think your love for CUSAT lets you to write as it is your malaise against your personal enemies. I do not know you. I do not know Arun. My aim is not abusing you. I feel bad about your personal vengeance hijacking the purpose of a good movement. Why should myself or others abuse you? All that I am worried is that your personal vengeance aids unfreedom! Bye Dr.P.Madhu Mr. Joseph Thomas,
This will be my last post here. I understand that the venue of Free Software is used by a few for personal feud. Your concern for Novell’s freedom is misplaced. What novell did is a sabotage. What the cusat people did is stupid. It seems you were cashing out of this incident by joining with the ignorant cusat people, who by now could have understood their grievous mistake. Novell is not arguing against their mis-treatment, CUSAT people are silent. Then why you are so much vocal for Novell? It appears CPM also is not supporting the Novell mess.I do not think such a sponsoring will be preferred in Kerala in future. As far as such a realization happening, the protest my Aniver and his friends really brought some fruitful awareness.
I have not seen any serious allegation by you against aniver by you as it appears something to do with your attitude towards them seen together.
Your target seems to be Mr.Arun. I do not know both of you. But I regret your personal feud pushed you to such an extent to extend your olive branch to the enemy of your hate character. Enemy of your enemy temporarily became your friend.
But, your presentation of your attitude was deceptive. You were talking about the freedom of novell. I do not think that was your real concern. Even if it were microsoft your attitude would have been the same- as you see only your enemy. That makes you myopic.
I do not know Arun. Neither I support him. But you were inviting comments by your provocative stand- which was insincere. Further, this should not have been selected as your place to fight your personal enemy what ever could have been the injustice committed against you. I desire he does not answer here. Such an answering and your counter accusations would make free software movement a laughing stock. That is very bad. Free Software Movement is not something to do with your personal feuds- especially that has nothing to do with its philosophy.
As you have some other motive your idea of freedom has to be neglected. Yet, for the sake of students who visit this place I would like to comment on the notion of freedom you invoke.
“Freedom” is not a private property. There is no your freedom and my freedom. Freedom is not a thing possessed. Freedom is a common field. It is an ecology. It is openness. It is resistance to dominance. It is being authentically human.
I have written about freedom here in detail: http://www.scribd.com/doc/6332438/Madhusuicide-as-Unfreedom-and-Vice-Versa
There is no such thing as Novell’s freedom! There is no such thing as Aniver’s freedom! All that matters is whether there is freedom, openness, resistance and authenticity! Freedom can be violated. Microsoft violates freedom. Novell violates freedom. That is it. There is no novell’s freedom.
It is absurd to say freedom is all about views and counter views and the patient listening of such views ….
Freedom is freedom beyond what-so-ever our views are!
In a world of unfreedom, only unfreedom will be peacefully continuing.
Now genetic codes and lives are owned by corporates. Do you think it is their freedom to own them? Do you think they can be peacefully questioned? Che was fighting. Was he peacefully working for smooth conduct? what is that smoothly conducted? If it is unfreedom it has to be questioned. No body should be free to impose unfreedom. When somebody imposes unfreedom that process should not be let to be conducted smoothly. Mostly unfreedom is imposed in the most smooth way. That smoothness is deceptive. Glib talks and lovely imposition of unfreedom is called imposing unfreedom using bio-power. Bio-power operates through glib-talks attractive advertisements, sponsoring, social work, Aids prevention etc. Look at coco cola. Their campaign for clean water for poor is such a bio-power. democratic etiquettes will hardly helpful to take on them. These etiquites are our state of subjugation. That is the violence on our authenticity. That is silencing our critical capability. That is the unfreedom penetrated to the core of our bone marrows.
The respect to CM or PM and who so ever has no meaning. Are you convent educated?
The job one holds, its norms… etc. are bullshit.
They do not appeal. They are not related to the idea of freedom as you portray them as if they were the test stones! They are something different.
What is your problem with aniver’s protest? If Arun has something to do with you in some other deal that is entirely different story. Bringing them here is meaning less. There is something hidden in your attitude towards aniver. I do not want to know that. But your opposition does not seem as plain as towards aniver not following norms of freedom! What you hide is not that much hidden.

Why do you instruct what arun should do or not do? Who are you to do that? If he does something inappropriate his higher officials would manage him. What is your problem?

CUSAT is not God! (Even God should not be beyond criticism!) Cusat is not beyond criticism. One has to be critical of the institutions- especially public institutions. They use public money. They have to be centers of excellence. When they are not they should be criticized. I do not think your love for CUSAT lets you to write as it is your malaise against your personal enemies.

I do not know you. I do not know Arun. My aim is not abusing you. I feel bad about your personal vengeance hijacking the purpose of a good movement. Why should myself or others abuse you? All that I am worried is that your personal vengeance aids unfreedom!

Bye
Dr.P.Madhu

]]> By: Joseph Thomas http://anivar.movingrepublic.org/2008/national-free-software-conference-boycott-novell-turn-outs/comment-page-1#comment-146 Joseph Thomas Mon, 24 Nov 2008 07:11:27 +0000 http://anivar.movingrepublic.org/?p=82#comment-146 Let Sri. Arun reply for the questions. I am not having any vengeance to any body. But Arun M has been creating such problem in the past also. This is the second instance. First in the BSNL meeting at Ernakulam years back, as reminded by Arun himself. Why one should go and create problem to the organisers in the name of freedom. One who participate, on invitation or otherwise, shall understand the difficulties of the organisers and respect their rights first. Freedom activists shall first respect the freedom for every body to express their views. Views can be countered with counter views in ones turn and not by creating trouble for the smooth conduct of the conference. You may be right and I may be wrong. But you dont have the right to dictate me to repeat what you say. Please bear with me, friends. Arun has been repeating such arrogance, this the second time. Here in the Kochi conference, he declared support for Anivar who created a problem in the name of freedom. Those who infringe upon others freedom doesnot know the very meaning of freedom. The question raised by the protesters was a question of violation of norms of software freedom. In the name of educating the violation of NOVELL's misdeeds, how can one attack the freedom of the organisers to ensure the protection to the exhibitor ? May be their allegation is that it is not NOVELL who is responsible for their presence, but it is the organisers who are responsible. Even in such a case, can the anti-democratic and violent protest tresspassing into the paid exhibition stalls and defacing the boards of NOVELL be justified ? There is nothing wrong in bringing out the wrong deeds of the organisers. But the action shall conform to democratic norms. Arun should not have supported the high handedness of Anivar and his friends and sat in protest in front of the meeting venue where CM was to address within a short time, in expressing solidarity with Anivar. Arun, being a public servant and the responsible person of FSFI, the sister concern recognised by FSF should have avoided it. My allegation is that such an over enthusiasm from the part of Arun has occured due to his connivance with Anivar and the joint action both of them have been engaged in organising a malicious propaganda against the very CUSAT conference even before the conference, even before taking the sponsorship of NOVELL, in the name of calling it the 2nd one to Hyderabad. Any amount of abuse on me will not make Arun clear of this undemocratic attitude. Any body is welcome to abuse me for having these things said. How will Arun feel, if some one comes and create this sort of protest demonstration where the International conference is being organised by him. Will he express solidarity with it ? Will he stand with the protesters when the venue managers push the protesters out. Let Sri. Arun reply for the questions.

I am not having any vengeance to any body.

But Arun M has been creating such problem in the past also. This is the second instance. First in the BSNL meeting at Ernakulam years back, as reminded by Arun himself. Why one should go and create problem to the organisers in the name of freedom. One who participate, on invitation or otherwise, shall understand the difficulties of the organisers and respect their rights first. Freedom activists shall first respect the freedom for every body to express their views. Views can be countered with counter views in ones turn and not by creating trouble for the smooth conduct of the conference. You may be right and I may be wrong. But you dont have the right to dictate me to repeat what you say.

Please bear with me, friends.

Arun has been repeating such arrogance, this the second time.

Here in the Kochi conference, he declared support for Anivar who created a problem in the name of freedom.

Those who infringe upon others freedom doesnot know the very meaning of freedom.

The question raised by the protesters was a question of violation of norms of software freedom. In the name of educating the violation of NOVELL’s misdeeds, how can one attack the freedom of the organisers to ensure the protection to the exhibitor ? May be their allegation is that it is not NOVELL who is responsible for their presence, but it is the organisers who are responsible. Even in such a case, can the anti-democratic and violent protest tresspassing into the paid exhibition stalls and defacing the boards of NOVELL be justified ?
There is nothing wrong in bringing out the wrong deeds of the organisers. But the action shall conform to democratic norms.

Arun should not have supported the high handedness of Anivar and his friends and sat in protest in front of the meeting venue where CM was to address within a short time, in expressing solidarity with Anivar. Arun, being a public servant and the responsible person of FSFI, the sister concern recognised by FSF should have avoided it.

My allegation is that such an over enthusiasm from the part of Arun has occured due to his connivance with Anivar and the joint action both of them have been engaged in organising a malicious propaganda against the very CUSAT conference even before the conference, even before taking the sponsorship of NOVELL, in the name of calling it the 2nd one to Hyderabad.

Any amount of abuse on me will not make Arun clear of this undemocratic attitude. Any body is welcome to abuse me for having these things said.

How will Arun feel, if some one comes and create this sort of protest demonstration where the International conference is being organised by him. Will he express solidarity with it ? Will he stand with the protesters when the venue managers push the protesters out.

]]>