[sldev] Re: SLDev Digest, Vol 21, Issue 29

[Edward Artaud]

Perhaps my choice of the word "fear" implied something I didn't
intend, maybe objection is a less loaded term.  However, I interpreted
your objections to be based on your view that these features are going
to be adopted into the viewer based solely on feedback or undue
influence from minority interests that somehow have gained special
leverage.  As I said, I can't comment one way or another on that,
although the points made by you and others about the CSI viewer,
Dazzle, and certainly SLim indicate that there may very well be
something to that.  My point about transparency was that if we don't
know what the roadmap for the viewer user interface is to begin with,
then we really have no way of knowing exactly how or why it gets
changed.  If your objection is that it's inappropriate to give even
the appearance of promotion or endorsement of third party viewer
projects given the uncertainty that exists on the process that governs
the official roadmap for the mainstream viewer, then that could very
well be a legitimate concern.

On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 2:32 PM, Random Unsung
<ravenglassrentals at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Edward, I don't suffer from "fears" and I am not riddled with "FUD" or a
> "Luddite". These are all absurd labels technologists put on people who
> question their activities in order to avoid real democratic participation --
> which they claim to be offering. I raise objections simply to expose that
> these supposedly "open sourced" and "community" viewers and other features
> (like SLIM) aren't anything of the kind -- that in this case, Jacek has made
> a highly troubling and defiant "manifesto" in which he explicitly demands
> that "usable" viewers be created by deliberately going around the public's
> wishes. I don't think the Lindens should be endorsing such radicalism.