[Linux-aus] Re: [CTTE] Re: Reaction: SCO case: Australian LUGs says it's a storm in a teacup

[Mary Gardiner <mary@slug.org.au>]

On Thu, Jun 26, 2003, Sam Varghese wrote:
> A large number of people/organisations do not reply to requests for
> information for their own reasons - which they are entitled to have.
> If their role in an article is crucial, I mention that they did not
> care to respond. Else they are left out altogether.
> 
> You may consider the word "bother" perjorative. In the context of the
> fact that the overall LUG reaction was to treat the SCO case as a non-
> issue, it merely conveys the impression that it is even less of a non-
> issue for SLUG.
> 
> If you wish to send a letter to be published online, stating your
> point of view, please do so and I will use it.

Sam,

We do feel that the word "bother" was inaccurate. However unlikely it
may have seemed to you at the time that SLUG did not receive your mail,
that was in fact the case. Thank you for your prompt response and for
your offer to publish a letter.

The SLUG committee doesn't feel that activism at the LUG level is an
effective way to respond to SCO's dispute with IBM and the resulting
publicity. Our main focus continues to be on local Linux users.

We are very impressed with the worldwide Linux community's response to
the SCO case, and feel that the responses of organisations such as the
Free Software Foundation, the Open Source Initiative and Linux
Australia, as well as individuals including Linus Torvalds, are a more
than adequate response to SCO's nonsense.

The SLUG committee feels that the best way for SLUG to be part of this
is for us to continue to advocate Linux at a regional level and to
support Sydney Linux users. The strengths of Free Software are the
communities of developers and users.

-SLUG committee