Lies and FUD about Ubuntu by Mandriva boss?

[Peter Garrett]

On Tue, 14 Feb 2006 19:32:03 -0500
Eric Dunbar <eric.dunbar at gmail.com> wrote:

> Elements in the open source community do quite a good job of diving
> into FUD themselves. How often does Microsoft get lambasted for things
> that aren't factually correct, or are hypocritical by pundits and by
> zealots (and by non-zealots).

The  trouble with  this line of argument ("We do it too, so that
invalidates our point") is that it doesn't relate to the issue itself..
The fact that some people do this kind of thing should not have anything
to do with our assessment of the quality of the work that their group or
community produces.

Non computer-related example: A lot of people don't like Rudyard Kipling's
imperialist opinions, but would still agree that he wrote some fine books
and poems.

I don't like Microsoft's imperialist tendencies, but I acknowledge that
once in a while they produce a decent program or two ;-)

We all know that there is hypocrisy in every community, company, or other
group, and if we are honest with ourselves we recognise that we all fall
into that particular trap at times.

On the other hand, yes, of course - we should try to argue from actual
examples and facts, rather than from blind faith or zealotry.

Eric Dunbar <eric.dunbar at gmail.com> wrote:
> The whole truth isn't
> particularly interesting since it's nuanced and weakens your
> arguments. 

It may not be particularly interesting. I don't think it weakens
arguments. Arguments based on fallacy are by definition weak, even if
presented in plausible syllogisms. If your premise is untrue, the
whole thing falls into a heap. 

Pamela Jones on Groklaw regularly publishes
long transcripts of legalese that frankly make my eyes glaze over: - but
the fact that the truth is there, accessible to all, makes a certain
company in Utah squirm, and provides incontrovertible evidence.


Peter