Linux move to FreeBSD

[Lane]

On Monday 04 July 2005 11:51, you wrote:
> > >-----Original Message-----
> > >From: owner-freebsd-questions at freebsd.org
> > >[mailto:owner-freebsd-questions at freebsd.org]On Behalf Of Dmitry Mityugov
> > >Sent: Sunday, July 03, 2005 2:03 PM
> > >To: Lane
> > >Cc: freebsd-questions at freebsd.org
> > >Subject: Re: Linux move to FreeBSD
> > >
> > >
> > >On 7/3/05, Lane <lane at joeandlane.com> wrote:
> > >...
> > >
> > >> It truly boggles the mind at how frequently people protest
> > >
> > >the on-going
> > >
> > >> decision to use beastie on the public face of FreeBSD.  It's
> > >
> > >almost like a
> > >
> > >> guest who comes into your home and then starts redecorating!
> > >
> > >...
> > >
> > >I believe there was nothing in the original question that would
> > >resemble "redecorating". It was a polite question about why FreeBSD
> > >had this "feature".
> >
> > No, it wasn't.  Not if you read the entire message context.  It was
> > a question along the lines of "how dare you do this" or "what idiot
> > used this"  He may not have used those exact words but the meaning
> > was clear.
>
> Disclaimer: I love the Beastie image and do not want to see him (it)
> changed.
>
> Sorry if this repeats something someone else has said (I admit I did
> not read every message in this thread), but it strikes me that folks
> are trying to have it both ways with Beastie: Yes, he's a daemon, not
> a demon, but he also has devil horns and a tail. Tennis shoes
> notwithstanding, he *does* look devilish.  And that fork in his hand
> (yes, we all know what the fork is), sure looks devilish, too. The
> point is that it's not surprising that those who are offended, or
> choose to be offended for whatever reason, are not persuaded by the
> daemon versus demon language.
>
> Don Tyson
Don, I agree.  It is not surprising that people choose to be offended by the 
image.  People choose to be offended by whatever they choose.

We make software choices based upon popularity, esthetics, availability, and 
even religious conviction - that is a personal choice, and I'm pleased to 
support such personal choice.  

But those who evangalize for or against a software (or other individual 
choice) based upon personal religious conviction are worthy of contempt - not 
education, not understanding, not even forgiveness, just contempt.  

I disagree with the earlier claim that this was ever a "polite question."  
This has always been an insidious attempt by outsiders and newcomers to 
influence the direction and even the history of some of the most important 
players in the open-source community, since the question easily applies to 
all *nix systems.  I grudginly accept that those who ask the question may not 
even realize what they are doing, but I'd wager that most evangelicals don't 
realize the impact of what they do, either - that still doesn't make it 
polite, innocent, or in any way acceptable.