25 Oct
2007
25 Oct
'07
8:59 a.m.
On 10/25/07, krishnakant Mane <researchbase(a)gmail.com> wrote:
following are my coments and reaction to this thread
and I want this
to be the last one.
that is NOT your decision.
firstly I can Understand that vihan reacted without
complete knowledge
of what was actually said in the conference.
so although his feelings are justified but those were not just a bit
rood but also targetted towards the wrong people.
if you bothered to make sure that the interviewer got his facts right
and made that a pre-condition before giving the interview or even
asked for a review of the article before it went online and had it
corrected it accordingly it would not have gotten my strong response.
In fact i would have giving my congratulations.
he is too young and I can understand his over
excitement in which he
may have targetted his feelings to the wrong person at the wrong
place.
With this statement you clearly prove that understanding is not a
function of age. You have NO RIGHT to make that statement since you
did not have the foresight to know the ramifications of what you said
in pubic and had absolutely no understanding of how to speak to the
press.
Don't go about touting wisdom as a response to messing up.
In fact you ought to apologise for not making sure how the article turned out.
my only advice to him is that when it comes to
comenting about such
things, first confirm from a person who is more experienced about what
was the reality.
You still don't get it do you, that article has probably been viewed
by hundreds, thousands, or even millions of people all over the world.
How many do you think are going about confirming what is true and what
isn't? The damage has been done because you were not careful.
i mearly pointed it out if it wasn't me it would have been someone else.
as an cineor person with 10+ years of experience, my
only advice is "think before you go on records ".
i think that is a highly ridiculous statement to make as ``senior"
people with ``experience" would know how to handle a situation like
this.
Did you THINK before going on the record? Believe me i certainly did
and i would gladly do it all over again all the same.
that will leave
less chances to oppologise later.
i haven't and have no reason to apologise to anyone.
You screwed up you MUST apologise to the GNU and GNOME projects.
nagarjun, thanks for responding late but only after
confirming things.
I have been a reporter myself for about 5 years
Either that is a lie or you are seriously stupid.
If you have been a reporter for 5 years this should NEVER have have happened.
and now into this IT
field for 10 years, I very well understand the dynamics of how things
get presented by the media.
Either that is a lie or you are VERY seriously stupid.
as nagarjun rightly said, we need to seriously speak
to the media.
secondly, I don't think we must insult the gnu/linux project by only
giving importance to the "free of charge " aspect.
if you really believe that then you ought to make sure such incidents
don't happen.
although when a screen reader would cost rs. 70000 for
a single
license, cost factor is equally important for an average blind person,
given today's economic condition of those people. employment is
difficult to come because if the employer has to pay 70000 rs just to
employ a blind employee, he will think 10 times before doing that.
and what if the blind person then leaves the job?
the investment is waisted.
but there are other more important issues as well.
think about this case,
one of my studant named Balaram from Kerala had a job offer from Taj group.
they had a software which he was expected to use.
but the proprietory software in question was not at all compatible
with what he was supposed to use.
now, had the source code of this software been open, it would have the
possibility of modification and thus being adopted to that particular
software. but nither the company took responsibility nor released any
part of the software for modification.
so the issue is not about cost (the taj group was ready to pay in the
above case ), the issue is about the freedom to modify that software
and after that use those modifications for who ever got that
opportunity to be employed.
so one should understand that freedom is not just the matter of
philosophy but it applies to practical life.
No one has disputed the practical benefits of free software on this
thread. Or are you justifying your mistake by saying the article was
absolutely fine? If the case is latter please don't go about giving
people the illusion that you are pro freedom in software.
Regards,
- vihan