shameful censoring of mono opposition

[Mark Fink]

On Sun, Jun 7, 2009 at 8:44 PM, Christopher
Olah<christopherolah.co at gmail.com> wrote:
>> there is proof posted in both articles
>
> There are specific events pointed to. I don't think your realize the
> severity of the accusations you're making (or supporting...). You are
> accusing members of the FOSS community of deliberately censoring and
> suppressing people. You are asking for people to be fired. There must
> be a high burden of evidence for that sort of thing.
>
> Specific examples are not strong enough. For example,
>
>> Now, watch this from Brainstorm. People make the suggestion that Mono should not be included by default and the page gets frozen with the following reason:
>
>>>    This entry was marked as not being an idea the 3 June 09. If this is a bug report, please use the Ubuntu bug tracker.
>
>> How is this not an idea? Sounds like an excuse to silence ‘dissent’.
>
>> One of our readers (unrelated to the above) told us this yesterday:
>
>>>    Hi Roy, the other day I noticed you linked to my brainstorm thread about keeping RB and not moving to Banshee, I mostly did it because I like RB and Banshee, besides of bringing a Mono dependency, is not really as good.
>
>>>    The thread, out of sudden was declared a ‘duplicate’, what’s worse is that the votes were not just locked (like what happens in brainstorm when something is marked as duplicate) but completely removed:
>    http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/20016/
>
>>>    It used to have many votes for ‘Keep Rhythmbox” and many negative votes for “Move to Banshee” , it seems that the Mono zealots have acquired too much control of ubuntu brainstorm this is a disgrace.
>
>            -----
> http://boycottnovell.com/2009/06/06/opposition-to-mono-by-default/
>
> These sort of things are honestly not that uncommon on Ubuntu
> Brainstorm, in my limited experience. It (seems to me that it) is the
> result of too many posting ideas that are often not enough people to
> administer it. Thus, it is easy for accidents to occur. This isn't
> necessarily censorship.
>

there's another example of this censorship here:

http://boycottnovell.com/2009/06/01/banning-opposition-to-mono/

it is far too commonly happening to just be a coincidence

-- 
Only by destroying MONO can Linux be saved.