Seems like Stallman is a conceited dinosaur who has outlived his time and mission. Perhaps that is why he was invited. He should have passed the orch long ago and just "done good works" instead of continuing his ranting and raving. He could be known and respected as a guru who made major contribution if it weren't for the fanatic and inappropriate raving he continues. The conceit to insist that the TCLUG name be changed is extreme, unprofessional, and unforgivable. I see no implication that GNU is ignored or disrespected in the name TCLUG: it's just plain and simple naming (KISS). We should not change the name, but could put a credit mention of GNU (etc) on the website. I would not bother to hear him talk after all this. I would recommend that his invitations to speak and to have a drink afterwards be revoked, but neither are mine to decide. Chuck > -----Original Message----- > From: tclug-list-bounces at mn-linux.org [mailto:tclug-list-bounces at mn-linux.org]On Behalf Of Sunny > Sent: Sunday, October 05, 2008 11:30 AM > To: TCLUG List > Subject: Re: [tclug-list] Stallman wants to meet us, if we are TC*G*LUG > > > On Fri, Oct 3, 2008 at 6:29 PM, Mike Miller <mbmiller at taxa.epi.umn.edu> wrote: > > See my message and invitation to Richard Stallman below followed by his > > reply after that. (I'm more than happy to pay for Stallman's food/drinks, > > etc. myself but would accept donations.) > > > > So here's the big thing: Stallman isn't saying that he won't meet with us > > under other conditions, but he is saying that *promises* to meet with us > > only if we change the name of TCLUG to Twin Cities GNU/Linux User Group > > (TCGLUG?). He wants the GNU in there! > > > > While I do recognize and respect the GNU participation in terms of > "GNU/Linux", and I support RMSs' fight so that it's not forgotten, > I'll have hard time to support name change, for the following reasons > (not in particular order): > > 1. To shorten long terms is so human for everyday speech, that I (as > not part of GNU project) see very natural for all practical purposes > to use Linux instead of GNU/Linux. > 2. LUG is very very popular abbreviation - I could not find any GLUG. > And for everybody out there (out TC I mean) LUG is something which > sounds familiar and understandable, but GLUG? > 3. I do not like un-negotiable conditions, no matter who sets them. > And frankly speaking, RMS can do better if he meets us, and convince > at least 3 more people that GNU part of GNU/Linux is important, that > requesting a name change, as the other way around - eventually not > meeting anybody (convincing anybody), if we decide not to change the > name. > > Anyway - in RMS's words (see the other thread) - I know he is right, > and I'll not object a name change, but I would not "recommend" it :) > > Cheers > > -- > Svetoslav Milenov (Sunny) > > Even the most advanced equipment in the hands of the ignorant is just > a pile of scrap. > > _______________________________________________ > TCLUG Mailing List - Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota > tclug-list at mn-linux.org > http://mailman.mn-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/tclug-list > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com > Version: 8.0.173 / Virus Database: 270.7.5/1704 - Release Date: 10/5/2008 9:20 AM >