[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] libreplanet-discuss Digest, Vol 67, Issue 16

From: Terry
Subject: Re: [libreplanet-discuss] libreplanet-discuss Digest, Vol 67, Issue 16
Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2015 14:15:02 -0600
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0

It is not prescriptive, so there is no way on earth we would criticize any
kid for their choices.
Then you'll make a poor teacher. It's prescriptive in a direction you don't
like and can't articulate other than to claim it would be inconvenient to
you. Proper teaching comes with a point of view and honest education
acknowledges and justifies that point of view. Accepting whatever a student
comes in with, whether their views on the subject matter, or the devices
they use, is bad teaching. Correction, critique, and advice are all proper
corrective measures any good teacher employs.

No matter what one specifies one teaches values. So as always it remains a
question of what values should be taught. You've made it quite clear that
you defer to proprietors and convenience. I hope the questioner's students
find teachers who have the necessary backbone to stand up for what's
humane, ethical, and a practical means of addressing real-world problems
that have been headline news for the past few years (thanks to Edward
Snowden's brave choices!).

I believe you should explain your views on Free Software then lead by example. Explain that propriety solutions are about creating a one-sided power dynamic. I think it would be great to follow that with having them read The Halloween Document II Key Quotes and ask them to guess who wrote that. They probably won't guess Vinod Valloppillil Program Manager at Microsoft. I think the last thing you should do would be any corrections that would push them to dig-in in opposition or discourage them, that abandon interest or enthusiasm. Plant the seeds and let them grow. Mental shifts take time.

The FSF has incredible geniuses who understand code, technologies, future directions and social implications. Their philosophies are incredible, however some lack of people skills contributes to remaining exclusionary through alienating many by not understanding and embracing people, varying intellects, marketing and rates of comprehensive shifts to new philosophical adoptions.

By using criticism rather than following my own advice above I have probably already put some on the offensive. Now I'm sure they are already taking an adversarial position and preparing an oppositional rebuttal instead of self examination to check if there is any merit to my remarks.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]