I thought it strange that RasPi chose to go the for-profit route for its user manual rather than a free download with the option of purchasing hard copy. But, as a writer I respect the right of a writer to decide how his or her work is licensed. Still, this case reminds me of a Pogo strip where the general store offered free root beer -- but you had to pay to use a glass.
I thought Liz's reply to your initial comment was -- how shall I put this politely? -- wasn't setting the highest standard of civility. And I don't think she understands the definition of "concern troll". It is unfortunate that one has to be so careful what one says over there.
Oh I don't really mind personally, as I'm rarely over there and coder27 brings us all the interesting news anyway.
But I do mind from an educational perspective, in that Liz is denying free (but polite) speech about completely valid topics and implementing ridiculous levels of censorship purely for personal reasons. Even-handedness and open discussion is completely foreign to her, and she's using her quite childish "concern troll" label to suppress everything she doesn't like.
It just doesn't fit into an educational programme at all, reasoned discussion is all-important. This isn't China, and she's not fit to be judge, jury and executioner on matters of education. The Foundation is in unsafe hands with her at the PR helm.
It's not terribly surprising - the RPi Foundation has never bought into open source (they didn't need to use the Broadcom SoC - they chose it) so the book and an aggressively litigous (taking your word for that Morgaine) publisher are in keeping with the ethos !
It does make you wonder about their motives - (and is the silence of the sensible hardware guy (Pete)) because they've silenced him ?)
Don't take it to heart Morgaine, we don't think you're a "concern troll" here.
I guess it will have to be someone besides Morgaine to ask what happened
I would have expected that Pete and Gert would be pretty busy since April
analyzing the RMA'd boards, and trying to make some improvements to
reduce the number of future returns.
But on Jun 22, Gert wrote:
"It is not important for me but for RS/Farnell , I assume (hope) somebody is analyzing the returns and uses the result to improve the production."
So if Gert isn't seeing the returned boards, then who is?
Edited to add:
On May 09. JamesH wrote:
"Did people know that boards being returned to Farnell/RS for being faulty are returned to the Foundation for further testing to see why they have gone wrong? "
I'm not sure how to reconcile James's claim that the Foundation is analyzing
the returned boards, and Gert's later claim not to know who if anyone is
doing that, unless Gert is somehow out of the loop or the Foundation's
analysis activity has stopped.
scep says that Ben Wiley (what a great name!) hasn't been
"party to what has gone on in the past". What could he possibly
be referring to that would make Liz come so unglued?
scep was referring to a private exchange of forum personal messages between himself and me which was a followup to this thread -- [url=http://www.raspberrypi.org/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=6224 -- about edits being locked after a short while to the posters of forum messages.
Unfortunately, now that Liz has banned me I no longer have access to my own personal messages, but you can pretty much imagine how the discussion went. I presented a large list of reasons why locking edits was to the detriment of reasoned discussion, and scep did not enjoy defending the RPF's locking policy and unilaterally terminated our discussion after a couple of rounds.
I have to give the Foundation's people full marks for consistency --- they all seem hostile to reasoned discussion.
And notice that now scep unilaterally terminated the thread with Ben Wiley. Yep, totally consistent. "Our decisions are not subject to discussion."
someone should put together a resume of exactly what her experience is.
I've seen all sorts of references to law, music, software, soldering, food,
education, business, publishing, photography, etc., but some of it is very difficult
to pin down. Sort of like trying to pin down Eben's contribution to the joint
book authorship. Where's her law degree from, for example?
thanks for the clarification. I've never before heard of a "concern troll"
expressing their concerns in private messages. That would kind of
defeat the purpose.
It's amazing how even front-page threads can get locked now.
When the forum threads get locked, they get a distinctive padlock
symbol, which makes it easy to identify threads that are almost always
worth reading. I still can't believe they had the audacity to lock the
QtonPi thread, which didn't go over well at all in the Qt forum.
At first the Qt guys thought maybe all threads get locked after a while
just to prevent spam, but then they investigated closer and found
threads still open since last August and figured out that the locking
was specifically directed at them.
The Qt situation may get worse, as it is now the end of June and
apparently none of the promised boards have arrived, and no
further communication either. They have even started making
blonde jokes about it.
Well, being married to an engineer certainly hasn't helped her understand how engineers make progress by identifying problems and finding solutions for them.
I wonder, when her ISP goes down, does she pick up the phone and identify her problem to customer support, or would that be "trolling" them? She seems to misunderstand the entire concept of highlighting problems so that they can be addressed, and thinks it's some kind of attack. Either that or it's a deliberate strategy for dismissing discussion about uncomfortable topics.
I really don't know which it is, but either way it's totally wrong, and for a PR person, it's completely inept.
What's worse though is that her rejection of reasoned discussion (and calling people names!) is really quite dangerous when the goal is to create engineers with good analytic and problem solving skills. What she's rejecting is the very basis of the educational process.
So I think your educational arguments are falling on deaf ears, and you are perceived as interfering with her right to a new kitchen (or actually a new house as they may be moving).
I believe I've read postings by Liz that say they're planning on moving to California. Broadcom's headquarters is in Irvine, near Los Angeles. They also have offices in Silicon Valley (San Jose, Santa Clara, Sunnyvale). FWIW, Silicon Valley houses are still astronomically expensive -- I don't know about Irvine. As a foodie, Liz might want to live in San Francisco (doable commute to some locations in Silicon Valley) or Berkeley (impractical commute to Silicon Valley).
The Foundation has always had a curious approach to community relations, but I think it just exceeded its normal levels of complete ineptness. I just got banned for a calm and polite defense of education and Open Access Publishing in the RPF blog --- http://www.raspberrypi.org/archives/1498#comment-26203
It's curious how an organization which has the alleged goal of fostering education doesn't allow the needs of education to be discussed.
It's a good thing that we discuss the technical issues with Raspberry Pi here, instead of over there. We'd have been banned 10 times over already.