Brainstorm is just a technicality. The point is that
- many users thought of Ubuntu's organization as a "democracy without
burocracy": when you have a nice mission ("Linux for human beings"), a
nice codebase to start from (Debian), a nice group of people and a nice
capital to start, who cares about the exact governing process?! There
are several great examples of BDFL in Open Source.
- instead the difference between Ubuntu and a(n ideal) democracy is not
merely _technical_: they just _don't share the same goals and
principles_ - in particular, Ubuntu has no commitment to do what is best
for the community.
- among the things that they do not share, is the way to communicate.
That's why a very smart marketing campaign, with a nice and friendful
logo, a name with deep meaning, a slogan that talks of humanity... all
that may mislead people into having excessive expectations.
<OT> And that's partly stupid, because in 2010 we should all know what
marketing is. Probably a partial excuse is that in the Open Source world
there is less abitude to those techniques. </OT>
But please don't point at _technical particulars_ of how Ubuntu is not a
democracy, I think it's not the point. It just _is not_ a democracy,
Mark himself stated it clearly, and we have no right to recriminate.
--
[Master] Window Control buttons: position/order/alignment
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/532633
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
