[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] [Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news

From: Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic
Subject: Re: [libreplanet-discuss] [Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 14:30:22 +0300
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/38.8.0

On 26.08.2016 12:46, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
> Le jeudi 25 août 2016 à 23:22 -0400, John Sullivan a écrit :
>> Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic <> writes:
>> Below are more attempts of ThinkPenguin to brainwash people.
>> This stops now on this list. ThinkPenguin is not deliberately attempting
>> to brainwash anyone, and we won't tolerate accusations of bad faith
>> here.

John, have you read in detail the discussion and followed the links?
Anyone is free to find counter-arguments to the arguments/proof I have
provided. And it's time someone else than Christopher Waid does that on
the libreplanet-discuss mailing list.

>> What this *should* be is a discussion among people on the same side to
>> refine text and messaging such that it is accurate, approachable, and
>> effective. Please make it that.
> Thank-you for intervening here. This is what I meant this discussion to be in
> the first place, not a targeted attack at Christopher, Luke, Thinkpenguin or
> Rhombus Tech. I'm really sad it has turned this way and condemn those
> accusations as well.

These accusations are my conclusions based on my several-year experience
as business competitor of ThinkPenguin and believe me I learned the hard
way he's doing it deliberately, me more than anyone else (except maybe

Essentially, the "EOMA68 as libre hardware" debate comes down to these
three simple questions:

Question #1:

What does "right from the beginning" mean in this paragraph:

"This project has been extremely unusual in that it has been a Libre
Hardware and Software project right from the beginning. Many projects
claim a degree of “open-ness”, using the word “open” in order to attract
users and developers, but a simple in-depth investigation of such
projects quickly reveals the claim of “open-ness” to be misleading or
outright false." --

Shouldn't that be corrected if the PCB design sources are not free at
this moment? It takes only 1 minute to correct it (for instance, state
that the computer will probably become "libre hardware" at some point).

Question #2:

If claiming this EOMA68 computer is "libre hardware" in the Parabola
news has been consensually considered in the Parabola community as being
misleading, how come it's not misleading to have the same statement in
the campaign's text even reinforced with "right from the beginning" and
how come it's not deliberately misleading to have such a statement since
the EOMA68 project leaders have refused to admit it's misleading and to
correct it.

Question #3:

If the EOMA68 campaign's text haven't mislead people, how come so many
people have thought that the computer is "libre hardware" and promoted
it as such, similarly to Parabola project in their news?

I'm copying again the not-complete list of such news/articles
perpetuating the same "EOMA68 as libre hardware" claim Parabola project
admitted it was misleading:

Hackerboards article, quoted in the campaign's page:

"The EOMA68-A20 COM and systems are claimed to be scrupulously “libre”
in both hardware and software"

Liliputing article, quoted in the campaign's page:

"Part of what makes the EOMA68 unusual is that all of the software,
hardware schematics, and even CAD files for the case design are all
available for free."

Retro-Freedom article, quoted in the campaign's page:

"we need computers that [...] Are based on libre hardware designs. [...]
Why the EOMA68 solves our problems"

Xataka article, quoted in the campaign's page:

"Parte de la gracia que tiene el sistema está en la en que todo lo que
lo rodea es libre y gratuito. Me explico, tanto el software, como los
esquemas de hardware, además de los ficheros CAD, son de libre acceso"

And other articles quoted in the campaign's page reiterate the same claim.

Additionally, the discussions have been reiterating the same claim:

"Open Source" Hardware Association's mailing list:

"Open" Manufacturing Group's mailing list:

Free Software Foundation community mailing list LibrePlanet-discuss:

Thread #1: EOMA68 - We have to get Free Hardware!

Thread #2:  EOMA68 - libre software, libre hardware, and eco-

And the list can go on.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]