Re: [Fsfe-uk] Fwd: OSS Watch inaugural conference, 11 December 2003

[Ramanan Selvaratnam]

On Sun, 2003-11-30 at 10:30, Alex Hudson wrote:
> On Sun, 2003-11-30 at 06:46, Ramanan Selvaratnam wrote:
> > May I know whether we  have we tried to get in touch with JISC before
> > writing them off?
> 
> We weren't actually talking about JISC, we were talking about OSS Watch.
> OSS Watch is a project funded by JISC, but certainly JISC itself has no
> claims about using or promoting free software. 

True. I was sleepy but being fresh now I do not think my suggestion to
explore JISC was too bad an idea. Especially w.r.t to Tom Coady's
suggestion that there are funding related obligations and all this being
within the realms of HE. 

> AFFS hasn't contacted OSS Watch in any meaningful way about this or
> anything else; but then we don't really tend to send out unheralded mail
> telling people to do things differently (unless those people are
> politicians ;). Andrew (who is on the advisory committee) 

Cool. With OSS watch we already have a lead then...
IMHO a leaflet stand itself at the forthcoming event could go a long
way.

> is obviously
> aware of the discussion having taken part on it, and I know others in
> OSS Watch are also aware of it,

With a conference like this I would be concerned about the first
impressions of the attendees than the what the organisers already know.


> JISC itself - unlikely. I'm not sure to what extent JISC keeps academics
> in the loop, let alone non-academics: most people I've spoken to know of
> JISCMail but nothing really of JISC. 

Precisely why at least with this event and the some of the points I was
making earlier, we need to understand how JISC (and any other similar
resource) affects software freedoms. To repeat myself I was trying to
point out that people who know more are in a  position to do so become
more active.
One thing I am certain is [http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/] is just the tip
of the iceberg. Actually it is more like a joke.

The reality on the ground is when students attend HE they get bombarded
with painful options (Word processor to specilist software) and setup to
go and restrict the freedoms of others.


> AFFS are probably a little too 'biased' for OSS Watch's liking

Can we even compare the very different interests?
We are about the primary benefits about a model of development they are
on about. I am not suggesting we jettison promoting OS models of
development but that we do not allow us to be even compared with some
one whose goal is not freedom.
 
Best regards,

Ramanan