Re: [hangout] Re: eGovOS conference in D.C.; I'm not attending that

[Jay Sulzberger]

On Sat, 8 Feb 2003, Stanley A. Klein wrote:

>
> At 06:47 AM 2/8/2003 -0500, Richard Stallman <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>
> >    If we go the press will report what we say.  Some reporters may partly
> fall
> >    for some Microsoft lies, but if we do not go, almost every reporter will
> >    present the worst, stupidest, and most vicious Microsoft lies as being
> >    "simply the facts".
> >
> >It is important to go to the event to correct the falsehoods, but at
> >the same time we must also cast doubt on the legitimacy of the event.
> >For people who think that "Linux" World reflects what our movement is
> >about, the simple fact that they invite Microsoft is a statement much
> >louder than ours.  How exactly to do this, I am not sure.
> >
> >The tendency for events that pretend to be part of our community to
> >betray its spirit is very harmful, and we have to push back against
> >it.  I wish we could push back much harder than we have done in the
> >past.
>
>
> Are you suggesting that in order for the conference to be legitimate a
> university and a conference committee that includes several government
> employees should deny a speaker from Microsoft the right to present the
> Microsoft position in debate before an audience almost guaranteed to be
> packed with active competitors and adversaries of Microsoft?

Of course.  Many government agencies and organizations are required by law
not to use Microsoft products for three reasons:

1. No second source.

2. Microsoft's conviction under antitrust laws.

3. Their products are radically inferior.

>
> Can you imagine for a moment the uproar and political firestorm that would
> result from such a situation?

Why should we worry?  Government agencies continue to violate both statute
law and adminstrative law by buying source secret systems.

Microsoft does not invite us to their meetings, and I have yet to hear of
any "firestorms", which by your logic, should have erupted every week for
the past ten years, at least.

>
> At the eGovOS conference in October they had someone from the Alexis de
> Toqueville Institute, a Washington think tank nobody ever heard of before,
> present a position in a debate with Bruce Perens.  The position was based
> on a paper that could easily have been ghost written by a Microsoft
> lobbyist.  (There was another pro/anti-Microsoft pair of speakers, but I
> don't remember who they were.)  I don't recall a pro-Microsoft question or
> comment from the floor during the Q&A following the speeches.  I even asked
> a question, which I intend to turn into a proposal for an IEEE-USA position
> paper on the conduct of public business in publicly interoperable data
> formats.
>
> As an attendee and participant in this and related events, let me assure
> you that the event does not merely pretend to be part of our community,
> it is part of our community.  And the spirit of our community is not
> betrayed.  Indeed, it is extending into government in very positive ways.
>
> Microsoft is working as hard as they can to exclude us from government.
> We need to block their moves.  For example, at the request of the
> government, IEEE-USA has committed to setting up a conference on "secure
> information technology" and I am working to ensure that the Free Software
> and Open Source software communities are represented there.
>
> I view the eGovOS conference as a positive move to help block Microsoft
> from what they are trying to do and to advance our cause within government.
>
>
> Stan Klein