shameful censoring of mono opposition

Mackenzie Morgan macoafi at
Mon Jun 8 03:06:54 UTC 2009

On Sunday 07 June 2009 8:22:41 pm Mark Fink wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 7, 2009 at 8:12 PM, Christopher
> > So, your saying that theres not a single corporation that has ${Vital
> > Application} written in .net? I'm not saying that it was a good
> > choice, but that is the way it is and Ubuntu not supporting it makes
> > it difficult for them to leave MS.
> but that's not how MONO is being used. it is being used to poison our
> desktops with patented M$ technology with junk like banshee and tomboy
> and f-spot. if I wanted *.dll and *.exe's on my system I would just

Filename extensions are how you choose your OS? Huh...alright, well, that's a 
new one.  You know I can name a shell script with .exe at the end and still 
have the first line be "#! /bin/bash" right?

> but they are the people that are infiltrating ubuntu and canonical
> people like directhex and the gnome-do developer I forget the name

Jo is a nice fellow, met him at UDS.  Didn't seem very much to be 
infiltrating...more like sitting around being cheerful and chatting with 
whatever folks sat down.

> >   - How strong is the evidence for these accusations?
> there is proof posted in both articles

Please reread.  The question was not "where is the proof?" but rather "*how 
strong* is the proof?"

> >   - Who is in a position to rectify this?
> I don't know that's why I'm writing here to get the MONO people kicked out

Ah, but that would be exclusionary and so...un-Ubuntu...

Mackenzie Morgan
apt-get moo
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <>

More information about the Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list