Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Golden Rule Angle for Libre Software Advocacy

[Adonay Felipe Nogueira]

We don't really need to go far as to rely on beliefs of "incarnation" or
"machine revolution". I personally accept everybody's beliefs on these
matters, don't worry. However, not everyone believe in the same things,
although accepting the opinions.

It's worth noting that, we don't really need to make up analogies to
explain our movement's goals and essential freedoms that we advocate
for. We just have to think on how to apply the essential freedoms of
functional/practical data to each case/field of knowledge (when
using/facing with functional/practical data, of course). Don't worry if
if people don't understand it at first, just keep trying, don't give up.
Also, it helps if you provide alternative explanations and examples to
the same people. Some people learn by hearing, others by seeing, and
others by doing/experiencing.

So far I have talked with almost 100 people in the college where I
study, about the **basics** of our movement. However, as far as I know,
only five people got the idea right (including the fact that it's not
gratis, it's not always "open", it's not **just/only** a matter of
"transparency", and like many other human creations, can have bugs or
failures, that can be fixed due to the presence of the essential
freedoms). They are not activists, and **might not** be free/libre
software users right now (that preferably use it for the true values,
not for the sake of convenience), but I at least have made them aware.

Also, comparing non-free/libre software usage with slavery is risky
also, and reminds me of a lengthy discussion on the English sub-forum of
the Trisquel project. Basically, the flaw of this comparison is that:
slavery has no opt-out possibility, while non-free/libre software usage
generally has that possibility, be it in hardware level, or in software
level.

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part