[fc] Charter brainstorm

["ioctlatoi'lseek" <not_valid@junkbusters.com>]

Howdy, been reading up on the various postings about getting
an identity to this motley band of truthsayers and my thoughts are:

   *  FUD is what we are refuting, on a case by case basis.
   
   *  Linux advocacy is a subtopic for us, but the primary charter
      is to address FUDslinging.
   
   *  Point by Point comparisions of differing OS does possibly have
      a place on site and in discussion, only if done tactifully,
      and in a manner that cites each and every 'fact' of comparision,
      so that we may maintain a high level of intergrity.

   *  In regards to intergrity and professionalism, the less emotion
      used in the writing found on site, the more effective it will
      be in being a catalyst for a non-Linux person to think, not just
      about the FUD that brought them to the site, but also about
      Linux itself.   Generally people want to belong to a group,
      but they do not want that group to consist of loudmouth looneys.
    
   *  Opinion pieces should be kept to a seperate area, so that one
      browsing the site will have it further reinforced that everything
      But the opinions area is fact, and those emotion based pieces
      are to be found solely in the opinions area.

   *  A setup similar to most news type sites, where each FUD story is
      giving a brief summary on the main page, and a link to the refutation,
      a message board, and offsite link to the original FUD, would be
      the most ideal and easily navigated setup.

   *  For a name I may suggest ...
           
                            The Linux Myth:
           The truth about Linux, Open Source Software, and You.
   
      This is a play on what prompted creation of this entity,
      Microsoft's own FUD paper, contains self-irony, and sounds catchy.
   
   *  Of Microsoft, and similar entities, whenever they are addressed in
      a non-opinion piece, the full and proper name 'Microsoft' should be
      used.   The point of doing FUD-breaking is to refute with facts
      and offer copy for other (mainstream) journalist to use.   It's
      much easier to have a line quoted and kept in context if it contains
      only factual information.
   
   *  We are not fighting fire with fire, we are fighting the lies and 
      dishonest marketspeak and technobabble that's always been dumped
      on us with distilled truth.  And nothing but truth.  If we don't
      win with truth, then we win the same way those we seek to refute won.



Sorry if this is long or boring, and it is all imho of course.


                                   ~phypor

(personal email : lostboy at bihs dot net )
-
Fud-counter:  Setting straight the facts
Archive:      http://mail.nl.linux.org/lists/
Web Site:     http://fud-counter.nl.linux.org/