G. Roderick Singleton wrote:
On Fri, 2005-11-04 at 00:53 -0600, Larry Gusaas wrote:
On 3 Nov 2005 at 19:49, G. Roderick Singleton wrote:
On Thu, 2005-11-03 at 16:50 -0600, Larry Gusaas wrote:
What is misleading about announcing a book?
What is misleading is that the author has chosen to send unsolicited
commercial email to the list in an attempt to make is t seem that
there is benefit for OOo. I can see none.
It is beneficial to OOo to be included in a book on free software that will be widely distributed
to the public thus increasing awareness and usage of OOo. Isn't that beneficial? Isn't that what
OOo is trying to achieve?
I find the For Dummies series to be very good
introductions to software. In fact having a book like this in
bookstores will more people aware of OOo. Making people aware of an
OOo manual is fine but you don't need to dis other authors work in
order to do so.
You may do what you want. I see you do not have any idea of the
problem.
I do not see any problem and you have not explained what the problem is. The problem I see is
that you are against authors making a living from their work. I suppose you want all music and
art to be free as well.
What is UCE? I've never heard of it. I have no problem with helping
OpenOffice.org generating a cash flow. Why do you have a problem
with authors earning a living form there hard work which will help
promote the use of OOo?
UCE unsolicited commercial email.
You answered one question. Why not answer the second question as well?
- -
Larry I. Gusaas,
Moose Jaw, Sask.
My friend, I answered this the other day. Repeatedly sending the same
message over and over will not get another. Please see the list archive.
As to the advertisement, I still think it was not a good idea but
apparently it is allowed so ...
I wonder how much of Mary's chapter(s) on OOo are original writings and
how much was lifted verbatim from the products of the Documentation
Project, which products are all produced by unpaid volunteers? Yes, by
the license, such behavior is permitted. Do I find it to be crass and
despicable, especially if nothing is returned to the project? You betcha!
Do I find arguments supporting such behavior coming from people who have
contributed nothing but their opinions to the project to be equally
objectionable? If you have to ask the answer, you really don't want to
hear it.
Volunteers like Gerry Singleton, who have contributed *thousands* of
hours of their own time to help move the project forward, have a
God-given right to be just a bit disgruntled when someone lifts their
work in order to make a personal profit without returning anything to
the community that produced the original work. It can be safely said
that anyone who doesn't understand that statement has never voluntarily
sacrificed a significant portion of their own comfort and convenience to
contribute to any effort larger than themselves.
Now, let us please move this thread to discuss@openoffice.org or kill it
altogether.
Doug
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
