[Linux-aus] Should Linux Australia change its name?
davidn at davidnewall.com
Tue Apr 24 20:53:40 EST 2012
On 24/04/12 14:27, Chris Neugebauer wrote:
> [T]he issue I'm referring to is having to explain the function of
> Linux Australia, as the parent body of PyCon Australia.
Mission creep is a problem with any aspirational name, and a situation
where a name no longer fully represents the mission is quite common.
Broken Hill Proprietary, National Cash Register and Adsteam are three
examples of this. As previously noted, A.U.U.G. had the same issue from
the same new technologies and for the same reasons as LA. It wasn't a
problem, though. AUUG, as it came to be known, ceased being an acronym
for Australian UNIX users group, and came to stand for open systems.
Frankly, had LA been embraced by AUUG more quickly, there's a
non-trivial probability that this discussion would, while having exactly
the same points expressed, be titled "should AUUG change its name?"
Avoiding mission creep is perhaps the reason why many companies pay vast
amounts for names that have no meaning: Sony is an example which springs
to mind, as is, arguably, Apple. For me, this is a distraction of
little value. Patently others disagree with me. My only concern,
should the name be changed, is that we would lose what public
recognition we currently enjoy; some say that's not much although I find
that idea quite dubious.
If promoting non-Linux-related events requires explanation of LA, I say
good: we should promote our brand and our values. We are, after all, an
organisation which encompasses the generous and open spirit of
hacktivism, which grew out of an alliance of Linux users. That is
nothing to be ashamed of nor from which to resile. We are free and open
software. We are Linux Australia.
More information about the linux-aus