Who's moderating this forum?

JD jd1008 at gmail.com
Sun Jul 18 00:08:51 UTC 2010

  On 07/17/2010 04:44 PM, Marcel Rieux wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 11:08 PM, Rahul Sundaram <metherid at gmail.com 
> <mailto:metherid at gmail.com>> wrote:
>     Governance in Fedora is rather light weight and board in
>     particular does
>     not interfere in day to day routine work which is led by contributors.
> Sometimes, the problem is not what they do but what they don't do. 
> There is no instructions to install nvidia drivers on Fedora's site. 
> Normal, since Fedora doesn't encourage the use of proprietary 
> software. So, a place like FedoraFaq provides instructions, 
> instructions that don't work (at least until lately). I know by 
> experience.  I know too that wrong instructions are all over the place.
> When something like this happens, maybe somebody of the Fedora board, 
> or on request from the board, should ask FedoraFaq to either modify or 
> remove the information. Once again, you'll say it's not Fedora's 
> problem since the info on Fedora's site is, it also seems to me, 
> fairly accurate and Fedora doesn't support proprietary software.
> The problem is some people -- gamers and 3D users -- need the Nvidia 
> driver and, since the site that provides instructions has Fedora in 
> it, they believe it's a most official source they can get instructions 
> from. If they don't get correct instructions they're pissed off at 
> Fedora, wrongfully, of course, but pissed off nonetheless.
> Steven Ballmer himself could be running FedoraFaq, he could bash the 
> users for not understanding his instructions, what would the Fedora 
> board do? People from the board or formerly from the board apparently 
> read this list. I expressed my concerns about FedoraFAQ, I said the FF 
> guy doesn't answer messages, doesn't correct the misinformation. 
> Nobody ever said the info was correct. What did the board do? If, as a 
> simple user, I know about such problems, how come the board doesn't?
> Have you ever seen sites such as microsoftfaq, applefaq... or 
> redhatfaq, or even centosfaq? There are sites with Mac, such as 
> macrumors or macworld. I don't know these sites. They might be just 
> some kind of Apple subsidiaries, but maybe not(1). In such a case, if 
> I was Apple, I wouldn't even allow this. You could put Apple or Mac in 
> the headers or the title of the page, but not use apple or mac as a 
> domain name... that is if the law allows this interdiction.

I do not believe the law allows this interdiction  as far as domain name 
registration is concerned,
as long as the registrants do not state they are an official fedora 
sanctioned or fedora sponsored site,
or as long as the domain name does not infringe on redhat or fedora by 
setting itself up, for example,
as the source for fedora released software. Even fedora mirrors have to 
get a license from redhat
to be mirrors.
fedorafaq does not make it official fedora which you already know.
You can even register fedoranews and do whatever yo like with it, but it 
is not and does not mean official fedora board approved news content.
Just the way the internet is.  I am glad this sort of domain name 
registration is open to the public.
Censorship is not in keeping with the freedom of choice.

Also, I think it is completely up to the user to take web information as 
"real and correct" or "bogus", including information on official sites. 
We all make mistakes and sometimes it takes us a long time to correct them.



> (1) Here, Mac magazines just don't question how, with 100 millions of 
> equipment, Apple was never able to detect such a fundamental antenna 
> problem.:
> http://www.macrumors.com/ (this page , of course, will eventually 
> change). Here's an excerpt for eventually searching:
> "While the new section of Apple's site provides an interesting glimpse 
> into the company's $100 million investment in antenna design and 
> testing labs, Apple went one step further and invited 11 members of 
> the media on a brief tour of the previously-secret labs following 
> today's event."
> and here: http://www.macworld.com/article/152771/2010/07/wireless_lab.html
> =============
> A copyrighted name is very important, not only for proprietary 
> software but for open source software too, I would say even more, 
> because of the resources multinational companies have at their 
> disposal to set blogs, lists or forums awry. I don't say if it's the 
> case now, but I know it could happen. In a word, if Linux can't be 
> bought, it can be subverted easily by a lack of regulation.
> Where can I read the board's position on the name copyright? Last time 
> I enquired, I was told there there is no Fedora constitution or 
> statuses because, in the US, Fedora can't be considered as a separate 
> entity from Red Hat. Still, there could be internal regulation rules. 
> Just having a way to elect a board doesn't seem sufficient to me.
> Geeks, like the all-programmers team of the board, think the less 
> regulation, the better. But it's when you write regulation that the 
> possibility of conflict of interests arises. Of course, as long as 
> there's no regulation, things can go on "as is" for a long time but, 
> one fine day, the rotten conflict blows out in the open and it's too 
> late to fix it.
> This is Red Hat's board of directors:
> http://investors.redhat.com/directors.cfm
> From their biography, how many do you believe are programmers? Not too 
> many I would think. So, how come there are so many programmers on 
> Fedora's board and so little on Red Hat's. I'm sure, clever as 
> programmers are, you noticed this at first sight. So what is needed to 
> run a software company or... project, administrators or programmers?

More information about the users mailing list