|FROM ||Brandon Invergo
|SUBJECT ||Re: [Hangout - NYLXS] Is negative publicity always harmful? (was:
Dmitry Alexandrov writes:
> Sandra Loosemore wrote:
>> The absolute worst thing the public-facing representative of *any*
>> organization can do is bring negative publicity to the organization
>> about things that are irrelevant or contrary to the organization's
> Iʼm afraid, you conflated two points. Publicity that undermine the
> core competency of an organization — yes, is perhaps is the most
> harmful thing for it.
> While negative publicity on irrelevant topics is either much less
> harmful, or sometimes even beneficial.
>> As a result of RMS's comments, all of a sudden the public
>> conversation about the GNU project was not about how good our
>> software is and how free software is taking over the world and
>> beneficial to everybody
> Dr. Stallman has been always, in almost every his speech, pointed out,
> that in terms of publicity everything is still so bad, that he has to
> struggle to make it known that GNU and free software movement in
> general merely exist. And that they are not the same as Linux® and
> ‘open source’, in particular.
> Under that conditions, any kind of public attention to GNU should be
>> It's been a public relations disaster for the GNU project. :-(
> Time will tell.
As I previously requested, please let's drop discussions of particular
people, especially when it comes to what they said or did outside of
GNU. I know you are not attacking but standing in rms's defense,
however at this point it's only going to stir up dying embers.
Can we just leave it there?
Hangout mailing list