Relish the freedom of free software -- change your system if you don't like it.

[J.B. Nicholson-Owens]

Mary Gardiner wrote:
> You seem to be arguing it as if it's black-and-white: Ubuntu developers do
> whatever the hell they want, he covers the GDM login screen at his workplace
> until he's done a theme switch and is duly thankful, get over it already.

Stated far more bluntly than I did, but essentially yes.  The freedom of free
software means Canonical can put out what they will and you can change it to
suit your needs, hire someone to change it for you, accept it as-is, or reject
it completely.

Such as it is with every other free software program -- (borrowing from Johnny
Cochran) if you don't pay, you have no real say.  You might influence the final
decision but if it is not your distribution, you don't ultimately make the call
for anyone but you and those willing to pick up your packages (is anyone
constructively offering alternative packages as defaults such that one could
add a line to their apt sources and pick up updates with the other Ubuntu
updates?).

The complaints I've seen so far contain no indication that the complainers are
hiring Canonical to do the work, therefore Canonical is free to supply what
they wish and we are free to change that to suit our needs.  We can complain,
but we should understand if our complaints fall on deaf ears.

> The meta-discussion about "you aren't allowed to make this criticism because
> _______" is pointless:

I haven't encouraged anyone to be silent so I don't understand this response.
Make whatever criticism you wish and expect bad arguments to be pointed out.
These mailing lists are here to discuss issues regarding the Ubuntu
distribution and Sounder is here to carry other discussions (I'm not sure where
the line is on this issue so I favored going to Sounder).  What I object to is
poor quality debating.

The framing of the debate thus far sounded particularly weak:

* I predict that some people from the Middle East will object to seeing so much
skin.

I've not read any posts from anyone stating such an objection, I've only seen a
prediction it will occur.  Might there be some group of people who dislike the
use of words I wouldn't use in typical discourse (swear words, calling
religious icons by name, etc.)?  What else should be changed to avoid offense
and who's responsibility is it to avoid offending you?  Are we proceeding along
the lines of letting the most easily offended among us decide what the
parameters for the distribution will be?  I see some value in this when it
comes to law (not distributing MP3 encoders or decoders will increase the odds
those in software patent-supporting countries can redistribute Ubuntu), but I
don't think the same is true about the debated artwork.

* I predict that businesses will not like this.  (Much like the previous
complaint but with businesses instead of people from the Middle East)

Depends on your business -- but this does beg the question of why it's 
Canonical's job to supply your business with something you want sans pay. 
That's not how consultancies traditionally work.

* The images are sexual.  Sexual images make me feel nervous or embarrassed and
here's my tale of woe...

I'm sorry that's true for you, but I didn't see the imagery as sexual or
inappropriate until it was pointed out to me.  I don't think the perception of
sexualized images adds urgency to this issue, however.

The embarrassment you felt was avoidable: preview the software before you put
your children or business colleagues in front of the program.  You'd do this
for technical matters -- not giving the latest OpenOffice.org to your clients
until you had tested it on their data -- why are you sitting your children in
front of the computer screen without acting as an intermediary?

* I won't run Ubuntu with these graphics as the default.

The threat of unpopularity (particularly with businesses) carries weight in the
open source movement because that movement was built to cater to businesses.  I
believe that free software advocates will reject reduced popularity as a
problem on the grounds that unsatisfied people are free to change what they
don't like (be it program bugs, lack of features, or inappropriate images as
GUI artwork).