[Mug-discuss] Re: Mug project

[Nick Hill]

Ciaran O'Riordan wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2003 at 12:31:13AM +0000, Nick Hill wrote:
>
> > The What is GNU? GNU's Not Unix  may confuse the unititialised. The 
> > monopoly aspects of Microsoft is something many people identify with, 
> > but can lead people away from the freedom aspects of free software.
> >
> > RMS likes to keep the issues of free software disentangled from the 
> > Microsoft argument.
>
>
> It's a tough scenario, how do you get people to think about
> software freedom when they only recognise proprietary things.

People rarely see advertisments for organisations looking to extend 
their freedoms.

It seems that everywhere, our freedoms are being eroded. This leads to 
an internal pressure to find freedom.

If the mug could project the image of an organisation 1) Trying to 
protect freedom 2) Is built on freedom and 3) is giving freedom away in 
terms of free software and 4) Is looking for peole to share and extend 
freedoms as part of the community... the MUG could become a strong icon 
and a mascot.

If it could also imply how the GNU philosophy is essential for what some 
regard as open source projects, we could bring on board 
non-philosophical programmers who misguidedly consider themselves only 
as open source. (Perhaps we need 2 mugs. One for programmers, another 
for the public?)


> I agree that "GNU's Not Unix" is just confusing to most, and
> I agree that we shouldn't be designing a mug that has "Microsoft"
> or "Windows" on it.
>
>
> Here's some ideas:
> Attack a Microsoft slogan, the most memorable one to me is
> "Where do you want to go today?", if they still use it maybe
> we could have a part of the mug say "Where will they let you go today?"
> or something like that.
>
>
> ...or maybe a picture (black&white) of a gnu concentrating and some
> windows smashing.
> "No need for windows anymore"
> "No windows between you and freedom"
> ...we'll need a better slogan but I like this idea since it doesn't
> advertise MS Windows but people who do use MS Windows would get the
> link.  (I got/robbed this idea from the cover of the "GNU Software
> for MS Windows" book, published by FSF.)
>
>
> A last idea is based on a phrase I can't remember properly:
> "[GNU/]Linux: No windows, no gates,
>  just a <forget> with an apache inside."
>
> Any ideas you have about using actual glass windows or steel gates?
>
> How about a man on a gnu with a lance charging at/through (and smashing)
> a window.  There's a picture of a man on a gnu on the cover of the GNU
> Emacs Manual, adding a lance would be easy.
>
> For drawings, I think FSF have a contact or two that do them zero-cost.
>
> I'll run up another draft on wednesday/thursday night.
>
> Any of this giving you ideas?

The GNU philosophy is constructive. It makes new things. It extends 
freedoms, creates new ways of organising society for freedoms. Empowers 
individuals. Promotes co-operation. Promotes philosophical debate and 
thought.

As such, GNU is very constructive and builds on the best aspects of 
humanity. It builds on the aspects of humanity which we hold in greatest 
esteem.

There are two paradigms of development. The second has evolved from the 
first, but in our modern environment and (lack of) society is being 
squashed by the first:
1) Darwinian Natural selection and survival of the fittest.
2) Co-operative development and mutual help and support.

The first is characterised by predation, destruction, assimilation and 
self-responsibility. The second is characterised by nurture, sharing, 
co-operating and shared responsibility.

There is so much which is constructive about GNU, we should concentrate 
on that. GNU isn't here to destroy Microsoft but to create something 
better. We are succeeding.

If GNU is characterised as a destructive force, those who wish to 
undermine GNU could justify their actions by believing they are 
attacking something destructive. If GNU is characterised as 
constructive, those wishing to attack will find self-justification harder.

I don't know how to express these things graphically. I we can think of 
an approach to comminicate these ideas, I might be able to come up with 
wording.