From owner-freebsd-questions Wed Aug 11 5:42: 1 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mail2.panix.com (mail2.panix.com [166.84.0.213]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D375D154DE for ; Wed, 11 Aug 1999 05:41:55 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tomg@nrnet.org) Received: from mailhost.nrnet.org (mailhost.nrnet.org [166.84.192.39]) by mail2.panix.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 764CB18C69; Wed, 11 Aug 1999 08:41:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (tomg@localhost) by mailhost.nrnet.org (8.8.7/8.8.4) with SMTP id IAA27575; Wed, 11 Aug 1999 08:38:53 -0400 Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1999 08:38:52 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Good To: Doug Cc: Gary Kline , Dutch Collins , Mitch Collinsworth , freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Question about the mascot In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Tue, 10 Aug 1999, Doug wrote: > > > argh. Does the Bell Curve invert when the population reaches a certain > > > point. > > > > > > That, or something similar! > > If it makes you feel better you can go ahead and belittle people > who are put off by it. Knock yourself out. But the fact is, the > demon/daemon mascot puts some people off. From a marketing standpoint a > logo that makes X% of your target market uncomfortable (where X is > actually, most everyone who doesn't already know what *bsd is) is bad for > business. It doestn't matter WHY it's bad for business, or how morally > superior you feel because you are above those considerations, it IS bad > for business. If you don't make *some* people uncomfortable you *are* doing something wrong. Nothing worth while has ever been accepted with open arms... People laughed at Linux and now Microsoft claims it makes them nervous. Whether this is a ploy or not (for the JOD suit) Linux is no longer a laughing matter. And I'm very pleased that it makes Gates nervous. I hope it impacts on his bottom line. I find the idea that access to information should be based on income more threatening than a cartoon daemon. If you don't like the daemon don't use it - no one forces you to like the mascot. I know lots of folks who resent the Cleveland Indians mascot (or the Washington Redskins) yet they still like baseball (or American football). But there is a larger issue. I mentioned form versus content. That is the real issue. Why does a daemon (which is a background process that runs independently of a terminal, not an incarnation of pure evil) make some people nervous when they have no problem wearing a Washington Redskins hat? Is it that the *idea* of a mythological devil and all of the dangers it *hints* at is more menacing than the reality of evil? Maybe so - this was the thesis (that evil is banal) so eloquently argued by Hannah Arendt in her account of the Eichmann trial. Personally, I find people who want to restrict others' freedom of expression far more evil than people who draw cartoon daemons. And the idea that they do this in the name of `morality' is particularly disturbing. There are ample historical precedents which clearly delineate the end result of this sort of `morality'. Ex post facto it is generally termed intolerance. Doug > -- > On account of being a democracy and run by the people, we are the only > nation in the world that has to keep a government four years, no matter > what it does. > -- Will Rogers `Democracy is three wolves and a sheep discussing what's for dinner.' - D'Arcy Cain ------- North Richmond Community Mental Health Center ------- Thomas Good MIS Coordinator Vital Signs: tomg@ { admin | q8 } .nrnet.org Phone: 718-354-5528 Fax: 718-354-5056 /* Member: Computer Professionals For Social Responsibility */ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message