Le mardi 23 août 2016 à 11:24 -0300, Adonay Felipe Nogueira a écrit :
Just now, I **have** subscribed to Parabola's dev mailing list. So
try to catch-up with this topic. :)
I'm inserting libreplanet-discuss and trisquel-users mailing lists as
recipients of this email because of my opinion on Tiberiu-Cezar
I'm also inserting a member of ThinkPenguin as recipient so as to let
him know the issue found by Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic, which is
furthermore in this email.
I agree with Paul Kocialkowski's original message
Furthermore, my **last** edit in the original pad
the most correct one (if the timeslider references don't change over
time, it should be
saved July 24th, 2016. After this version, the misleading text gets
Feel free to contribute to the revision pad:
Others: what do you think of this version? Please acknowledge when you
it's ready. At this point, revision 310 suits me fine:
However, I would gladly skip the part following "However, it's
important to note
that:". Providing details there seems like a very slippery slope and
link to relevant posts or information from the campaign page. Better
quoting parts from there would be even more appropriate.
For instance, "2D and video acceleration work well with free software",
being true, is not precise enough to be a really useful information.
part about the circuit board is too vague, since only the EOMA68 card
the landing board or laptop board) were said to be withheld.
About Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic's message
Indeed, the use of "free software friendly" to also mean "fully free
software" or "freedom-respecting" is a communication noise (article on
Basically, in context of marketing (not sales), a communication noise
happens when **either** the senders or receivers of a message
distort-or-misunderstand the message.
Besides, I'm inserting a member of ThinkPenguin as recipient of this
email so as to let him know the issue that Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic
in ThinkPenguin's website content. This was done so as to make it
for ThinkPenguin to see the issue. This **is not** meant to be taken
They may agree that it's an issue or not. I don't think it is one.
For the record, you're probably referring to "Company #2" from: