On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 22:20:11 +0000, beb ben@psychoferret.co.uk wrote:

Sid Dabster wrote:

...

*** Proposal for a FLOSS/Linux Political Party ***

I suggest a Linux Party is formed to promote the idea of free software (and possibly related ideas).

But what are your policies towards the environment, health, crime, terrorism, transport, taxation and homelessness?

--

<Insert Bill Hicks quote here>

---

main@lists.alug.org.uk http://www.alug.org.uk/ http://lists.alug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/main Unsubscribe? See message headers or the web site above!

send everybody who complains to france, or america!

The message 200502232304.45327.ALUGlist@digimatic.plus.com from Wayne Stallwood ALUGlist@digimatic.plus.com contains these words:

On Wednesday 23 February 2005 10:20 pm, beb wrote:

...

But what are your policies towards the environment, health, crime, terrorism, transport, taxation and homelessness?

I think what Sid is proposing is a single-issue party. The aim of these is somewhat different to that of a full manifesto party that pretty much has to have a policy for every issue.

The whole point of a single-issue party is not to gain elected office, but to attract enough votes that a full manifesto party will start paying attention to that single issue and adopt the same policies to gain the single-issue parties votes, either that or some single-issue parties actually do manage to 'grow' to a full manifesto but it's quite rare.

That's the way I think I understand it anyway, somebody more versed in politics can correct me.

Sounds about right.

Of course, what we want is a politician to do the 'leading', and since (uncharacteristically) we haven't heard anything from the In Vino Veritas Party since its inception, there might be a spare one of those floating around.

More seriously though, it might be a good idea to interest someone like Michael Portillo or Brian Sedgmoor - both, after their fashion principled men, to front the mooted party.

A promise to address the problem of spam and virus propagation at a national level *MIGHT* even see a candidate elected...

What you describe, and possibly what is needed, is not a full blown political party, but a pressure group. A pressure group does not need to have any policies at all, apart from those on the situation that they wish to change.

Even a so-called single issue party such as UKIP has to have policies on all issues just in case they find themselves elected.

A good way to proceed would be to formulate the actions that you would like to see taken, put them into English that a retarded six year old might understand, and post them to the main political parties suggesting that they follow the actions as outlined. You might be surprised at the results.

Leon Stedman (UKIP member.)

--- Leon Stedman leon@RumahMas.fsnet.co.uk wrote:

What you describe, and possibly what is needed, is not a full blown political party, but a pressure group. A pressure group does not need to have any policies at all, apart from those on the situation that they wish to change.

Even a so-called single issue party such as UKIP has to have policies on all issues just in case they find themselves elected.

A good way to proceed would be to formulate the actions that you would like to see taken, put them into English that a retarded six year old might understand, and post them to the main political parties suggesting that they follow the actions as outlined. You might be surprised at the results.

Leon Stedman (UKIP member.)

I have some knowledge of UKIP, they are a single issue party, which is one of the reasons Veritas was formed. We already have a pressure group the AFFS, we need to go on to the next step, it going to happen, lets be first here in East Anglia rather than waiting for someone else. Imagine a party political broadcast on Anglia TV, made using Dynabolic. How about putting the proposal on a Wiki page.

Below is a letter I got after asking the library spends on proprietary software, I did not use the phrase "Open Source":

Dear Sid Dabster

I am writing in response to your letter of the 3rd February addressed to Janet Holden regarding the use of Microsoft and the other proprietary software in the Library service.

The use of Microsoft operating and application software is based on Norfolk County Council's agreed technical standards which cirrently dictate certain software such as Microsoft Office and the Windows operating systems environment for desktops. The authority is mindful that Open Source Software is now emerging as a potentially viable alternative but will need to carry out a detailed evaluation of products and the implications for the organisation. Part of the assessment would need to be a consideration of any direct or indirect costs of migration including re-training and the implication on external providers of services and support. Currently however the authority does not have the resources to undertake this exercise given the pressure of other commitments.

For public use, the Microsoft operating system was originally dictated in the specification for the lottery funded People's Network project which funded the provision of internet access in public libraries. Although this specification did not dictate use of the Microsoft Office suite, at the time of our original roll-out of public terminals for the Millennium Library and the People's Network this was effectively the de-facto standard and the product most users would have expected to be able to use. Microsoft products remain the market leader and most of the formal and informal ICT learning resources (e.g CLAIT and ECDL) are based around this environment. With regard to viruses, Microsoft products are clearly subject to the most concerted malicious and we therefore deploy updated anti-virus protection software. We are not aware of any issues with virus infection but if you believe that the PC you are using has become infected, please report it to our staff. With regard to the cost of Microsoft software, the Library Service does benefit from academic licences which significantly reduce the licence fees.

I understand your comments regarding the costs of providing the computers in libraries and the fact that two libraries in the county were closed in 2003. However, the decision to close Lazar House and Bradwell libraries was very related to a sleep decline in use of these services. At the same time as closing the libraries, the County Council further developed the library service by increasing the opening hours of almost every library in Norfolk by 20%.

Thank you for taking the time to raise this matter. Clearly Open Source software presents us with a potential opportunity that we will need to explore in the future.

Yours sincerely

David Jones

ICT Operation Manager Cultural Services Department ICT Services County Hall Martineau Lane Norwich Norfolk NR1 2UA

As you can see he has avoided the question, the Freedom of Information will be needed to get costs. The line that really gets me, is the bit about external suppliers. Linux has been around for 14 years, is based on a 35 year old system while the GPL is 21 years old. Businesses trial Linux in 1997 and then adopted it, when is Norfolk CC going to get the message. I wonder how many MSCE people are in NCC, perhaps another FoI request.

______________________________________________________________________ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca