Who are linsux.org and what do they want?

dave's picture
Submitted by dave on Mon, 06/01/2009 - 09:59

I just saw a submission in our upcoming queue from the linsux.org site which links to a forum in which one of the linsux.org members - among other things - encourages other members and readers of linsux.org to join the FSDaily community in order to vote down all stories from Boycott Novell. While, it was evident from this that at least some of the linsux.org members oppose Boycott Novell, and clear from looking around the site that they oppose "Linux", I became curious to know exactly what the aims of the site and it's community as a whole are and exactly what it was they're opposed to.

I tried to have a look around on the site but I didn't find an about page on the site and the search feature seemed to be broken for me at the time due to the CAPTCHA system not displaying CAPTCHA images. So, seeing as at least some of them visit FSDaily, I thought I'd ask any of their community who read this to respond.

I would like to know the following:

  1. What is the aim of your site/community? Simply being opposed to "Linux" doesn't give us the full picture.
  2. Also what exactly is it that the linsux.org community are opposed to? Regarding the following points: are you opposed to them, and either way how do you feel about each of them and why?:
  • the Linux kernel OR the GNU/Linux OS OR both?
  • Linus Torvalds?
  • the FSF?
  • Richard Stallman (like many other BSDers are)?
  • the GPL and similar licenses?
  • free (as opposed to open source) software?
  • open source software?
  • software patents?
  • Microsoft?
  • proprietary software?
  • the open source community?
  • the free software community?

I mean, as FreeBSD supporters, I guess they aren't anti-free software as such, but perhaps they see themselves as pragmatists in regard to licensing and therefore are only interested in quality and not necessarily in the ability to access and modify the code?

To be clear, I don't mind either way, I'm just wondering - different strokes for different folks. As far as I'm concerned, everyone is entitled to their opinion... And, while we may not agree, we can at least disagree in an agreeable fashion, without impinging on each other's freedom.

I also would like to say that, even if the majority of the FSDaily community think it isn't okay for them to submit posts that are negative toward free software, it IS fine by me. But it's also fine for the majority of the FSDaily community to vote them down and comment on them. And, while, I'm opposed to personal attacks and/or obscenities, I do believe _most_ criticism can be useful (and almost always a requirement) for development and progress to occur (although, obviously, constructive criticism is better for this). Furthermore, even though negative posts are often voted down by the majority of the FSDaily community, negative submissions are often interesting for our community to read. Even the less constructive stuff can be interesting and useful because it helps the community to see what and how our opponents think. Ultimately, though, I don't have a say in what people submit (I do remove submissions that are off topic, offensive and/or spam) and I don't choose which stories get promoted - as you most likely already know, the FSDaily community does that, and all you have to do to have your say is sign up.

If the linsux.org community are going to join up to FSDaily and participate, I hope they can be encouraged to participate more constructively and in more ways than just by blindly voting down certain posts. It's really important for them - and everyone else - to post (civil and articulate) comments, rather than just voting negatively. Positive votes on stories that they do agree with would obviously be welcome and, it would also be good to see a variety of submissions - not just anti-Linux or anti-Boycott Novell submissions. Pro-FreeBSD posts, for example, would be greatly appreciated. The pro-Linux community and the pro-FreeBSD community do share some common ground and both groups should be welcome in the FSDaily community.

I've always intended for FSDaily to be a forum for the free software community to share news and articles and to discuss (and debate) the issues raised in a positive and constructive manner. And, despite the fact that, by it and it's community's very nature, it promotes free software, FSDaily isn't meant to be a propaganda machine for Linux, GNU/Linux, the GPL, RMS, the FSF, Boycott Novell or another sub-group within the free software community. In fact, it's not even meant to be a propaganda machine for free software itself - that's just a by-product.

Having said all of this, I have two messages:

  1. To any of the linsux.org people: feel free to register if you haven't already. Please do contribute to FSDaily positively or, at the very least, constructively. And, please, invite more of the free software community to join in. I look forward to some healthy and constructive debates in the future.
  2. To the rest of the FSDaily community: please treat negativity, not as an insult, but as an opportunity - an opportunity to learn more about our opponents and (more importantly) ourselves, and to use that knowledge to our advantage for the good of all of us.

All the best!


Mr. Psychopath's picture

Mr. Psychopath

10 years 19 weeks 17 hours 25 min ago



I will help you unclench a little by giving you the facts, which you seem to neglect actually looking at. Truth be told, many of these things can be answered by reading the stickies or considering the content of the writing.

Linsux.org is largely satirical.

* We don't actually mind GNU/Linux itself, but we absolutely hate what fanboyism from Ubuntu has done to the community. Instead of being a group of developers that admitted that the GNU/Linux desktop had faults, they started throttling everyone that held different views from them.
* As far as I'm concerned, anyone who repeatedly calls OpenBSD developers "masturbating monkeys" and "f*cking retards" directly on their own mailing lists for the fact that they aim for security is not OK by me.
* The FSF is a highly radical foundation that is more talk than it is action. For example: instead of working on developing a Free Media framework for the web, they would rather reverse-engineer a proprietary one.
* I can't speak for the rest of Linsux, but I personally like Richard Stallman and what he's trying to do.
* We're okay with the GPL and what it stands for.
* I personally very much enjoy Free Software, and in many respects most of the staff use it to some extent.
* Open Source is not all that different. If it's really good software such as OpenSolaris, I'll use it.
* Let's not kid ourselves, software patents are horrible for everyone, just like patenting in the scientific community. It gets nothing achieved because too many companies are covering their rears.
* Microsoft is a company, with human beings working inside it. Regardless of its own intentions, you shouldn't label a company full of people you've never met as "Evil, Freedom hating shills". I can't recall how many times BN has chased after a blogger with their own personal opinions who were aligned with Microsoft. No Roy, it's not a clash of interests. It's Free Speech.
* If it's good we'll use it. Recently we were considering switching our boards to Invision Power Boards, for the sake that in many respects the software is more extendable, themeable, and intuitive than phpbb3 and SMF.
* This community usually consists of paid developers working on a Free UNIX such as FreeBSD or OpenSolaris. We usually say good things about their software due to the high quality of integration in their software.
* To say that Free Software is one community with one viewpoint is a little misguided. Free Software is an Internet ecosystem in which developers work towards a common goal. However, many developers will use different philosophies or practices due to the very elastic principles of Freedom. I personally agree with many of the things done by the GNU project, as well as the KDE project. However, when one looks at some of the elitist communities such as Debian or uninformed communities such as Ubuntu, you get groups of people that attempt to alienate users of different systems with their own "superiority". It works against the very goals Free Software is trying to achieve. Rather than "Let's work together!" it becomes "We have to defeat those evil M$ shills! Death to Steve Ballmer!"
Yes trust me, we hear that one alot. BN supporters actually consider that kind of thing to be clever, unique, and funny. It's really an old one, and it makes most of us roll our eyes at what FOSS journaling is largely becoming.

dave's picture


10 years 19 weeks 16 hours 33 min ago


A couple of things to note

1) I wasn't clenched at all. I was quite relaxed about the whole thing actually. :) I was hoping to relax more people by getting these answers, and I think it's probably worked.

2) I did look around your site but found no about page or obvious info detailing what you were all about. I figured asking you directly would be easier and more useful for the readers here.

3) Fanboys are always a problem no matter what it is they are raving about. Every community has them. They need a cause to support and I agree they can do more harm than good. The hard sell approach mostly just drives people away. In case you were anti-Linux fanboys for real (which you can't blame me from thinking was a strong possibility), I was trying to take preventative action to try and prevent a fanboys war from breaking out which could potentially ruin the FSDaily in the way I feel digg.com has been ruined.

schestowitz's picture


10 years 19 weeks 15 hours 29 min ago



I had left over 13,000 comments in Digg.com before leaving it (I was once ranked 17th in Digg.com). The same Microsoft trolls from USENET and Slashdot infested the "UNIX/Linux" section and their goal was achieved when reputation was down the drain. See Comes vs Microsoft exhibits for details about these tactics.

I guess the attacks from Linuxsux (an anti-Linux site BTW, I urge you to look closely enough) simply prove that things we write are anti-anti-Linux, i.e. they annoy the anti-Linux crowd. It means these writings help GNU/Linux.

Mr. Psychopath's picture

Mr. Psychopath

10 years 19 weeks 15 hours 15 min ago



It only means the BN is Pro-FUD, rather than Pro-"Solve the problem by uniting the community and encouraging them".

It's really no small wonder that your credibility is going down the drain. Anymore you base your articles off of such "shocking social villains", such as "the guy that ate lunch with a Novell employee once, and then said he liked Windows 7 in a blog"

Although I doubt you'd ever actually write that, I'm trying to make you see my point. You spread FUD all over FS Daily in an attempt to make FOSS supporters fear Microsoft. In many ways, you're tantamount to the fear-mongering of FOX News and the like. You're a headache in a community of otherwise friendly and positive people, and the "news" that you report only bears down on people. Your spin zone puts all sorts of weird things into factor, such as Mono being an evil, evil language, or Novell being the absolute devil for making a business deal.

You're a yellow journalist, like Hearst. I recommend you step up and actually start promoting all the good things that happen for Free Software, instead of being a thorn in everyone's side.

Mr. Psychopath's picture

Mr. Psychopath

10 years 19 weeks 17 hours 24 min ago


For the Record

The bullet points correspond with your questions, if you failed to figure that out.

trojan1223's picture


10 years 19 weeks 11 hours 16 min ago


Quick thoughts

1. What is the aim of your site/community? Simply being opposed to "Linux" doesn't give us the full picture.

Linsux.org has quite a few goals. We're not actually opposed to Linux, we simply feel that if we let the Linux community get as bad or even worse than the Apple community in terms of fanboyism, that it will destroy any chances it has to succeed on the Desktop. Almost every staff member runs Linux here.

2. Also what exactly is it that the linsux.org community are opposed to? Regarding the following points: are you opposed to them, and either way how do you feel about each of them and why?:

* the Linux kernel OR the GNU/Linux OS OR both? The staff are generally not against those two things.
* Linus Torvalds? I don't really care for him, but that would be personal preference.
* the FSF?: They're bat shit crazy, so yes.
* Richard Stallman (like many other BSDers are)?: No comment
* the GPL and similar licenses?: I personally prefer the BSD license, though I don't hate the GPL.
* free (as opposed to open source) software? We generally have little problem with the way X package is licensed, you should use what works best.
* open source software? We like it.
* software patents? Dislike to a degree.
* Microsoft? No.
* proprietary software? Read above.
* the open source community? Yes, the zealot end of it.
* the free software community? Even more so.

Sir Sane (Mr. Psychopath) offered up a much nicer and larger write up to the questions, which can be read above, this is just my personal opinions as the site creator.

mirshalak's picture


10 years 18 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago


My answer

Hi Dave,
I'm a relatively new reader of Linsux.org. I'm probably not going to answer all of your questions exactly, because that would take a very long time, but I do want to summarise generally how I feel.

The simplest way of putting it, without meaning to sound excessively judgemental, is that I have engaged in both active research and usage of Linux and FreeBSD over the last 12-14 years now.

All of that observation and experience have led me, first intuitively, and then more rationally, to a realisation that of the two systems, both the BSD system and license were greatly preferable to me, rather than GNU/Linux.

This is not to say that GNU/Linux does not have the capacity to be an incredibly positive, empowering, life-changing system in its' own right; of course it does. It is simply a matter of a preference which has developed over time.

I feel that the BSD license is a means of practicing somewhat more unrestrained compassion; we don't have the legal requirement of source code availability, and instead have to rely on the positive elements of human nature, which we also wish to cultivate and encourage, in order to ensure said availability.

There also is no real danger, many of us I think feel, of anyone "stealing," the source code and making it entirely unavailable. Anyone is free to obtain the source themselves and, commercially speaking, do whatever they want with it. Because what they obtain is a copy, nothing is lost. We still have ours, and they have theirs. There have been, to my knowledge, no scenarios where the BSD license has needed to be enforced in court, because truthfully, there is nothing to enforce. Nobody has tried to destroy the central FreeBSD repository, either; the project has not had a need to defend itself from such.

So we see the world as being a source of far less threats, I think, than the FSF. I do not see Microsoft as being a threat, either. There are media files in existence with DRM, yes; but there are also many more without it, and I feel that that will always remain the case, simply because the prevalence of DRM is not something that is in accordance with the collective will.

Microsoft may have destroyed Netscape, but there again, we see the metaphorical truth of the words of Ben Kenobi; struck down, Mozilla became more powerful than ever before. Firefox and the suite's other applications have all become open source, and their long term wellbeing is far more effectively assured as a result.

If I could offer any message to anyone within the GNU/Linux community myself, it would be a request to let go of fear, as I feel, speaking as diplomatically as possible, that fear is one of the motivators of much of what I have seen the FSF as an organisation do.

I used to be quite an adamant opponent of the FSF myself, but I realised that in doing so, I was likewise allowing fear to guide my actions.

Fear of external entities, whether they be Microsoft or whoever else, and feeling a need to take opposing action towards them, is not, I do not believe, the most effective way of accomplishing our objectives.

I feel that the BSD license and overall approach is one which is more purely resonant with Gandhi's philosophy; that we can do much more effective good by simply focusing on what is important to us, and what we *do* agree with and resonate with in a positive sense, than we can by engaging in fear-motivated activism in opposition of those things which diverge from that.

We should not ultimately fear destruction from those who oppose us, if only because the most important thing that said fear does, is reduce our ability to be true to ourselves.

Even if, hypothetically speaking, it were possible for Free/Open Source Software to be completely destroyed by the corporate world, (although I do not believe that such is possible) such a thing is not actually primarily relevant. What is primarily relevant is the fact that, for whatever amount of time before that happened, we would have been true to ourselves, and in doing so, we would have been able to show those around us something more positive.

Money, pragmatism, and ultimately, even self-preservation are not that which is most important. Some within the FSF may see the BSD license as being potentially self-destructive, but truthfully, it isn't. It is simply the license of choice of those of us, who realise that it is more important for what the license represents, in its' purest form, to exist for whatever length of time that it can, than to dilute said license, and its' underlying ethos, due to fear that it will not survive otherwise.

starcannon's picture


10 years 17 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago


Linsux.org Speaks for itself.

One does not need a bulleted message to speak for linsux.org, it truly does speak for itself.

I could take this time to give my opinion, but really, I prefer you to make up your own mind. Go to http://www.linsux.org read through their posts, make up your own mind. If you find intelligent, well written, constructive posts, then by all means use them to your benefit; don't take a bulleted post, or criticisms from an anonymous source, just go read their forums, they speak volumes on the intelligence, integrity, and technical information that linsux.org has to offer.


A quote from Sir Sane/Mr. Psychopath concerning a post by trojan1223(do read the entire thread):

An excellent write-up of today's events. I'm becoming concerned about how we've got things laid out. Perhaps we should try and spell out the obvious facts about us clearly?

You'd think it were obvious by the fact that we say "Godly Windows Operating System". Sheesh.

mirshalak's picture


10 years 17 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago


just go read their forums,

just go read their forums, they speak volumes on the intelligence, integrity, and technical information that linsux.org has to offer.

I love the subtlety, here.

It's abundantly obvious that you are, in fact, making a negative judgement about the site, while still doing so in such a way that ensures complete plausible deniability. And of course, if you bother to respond to this, you likely will deny it.

Personally I find the kind of open profanity that some of Linsux.org's posters admittedly do engage in, to be infinitely more morally desirable than this kind of veiled hypocrisy. They might be juvenile and sociopathic, yes; but they're also honest.

starcannon's picture


10 years 17 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago


Veiled Hypocrisy

What is obvious to one is not obvious to another. I have never posted anything that would indicate my support for the linsux forums; indeed quite the opposite. I made my "Just go read their forums" post in response to the long winded bulleted presentations above. Honesty is not something I have experienced with the linsux intentions; they organize a raid, then sell it as a good and just cause, meanwhile barking like hyenas back at their own forums about how stupid everyone is on the forums they are raiding; siting posts, and claiming there is no one giving any intelligent response, and oddly the posts they site have little or nothing to do with anything to begin with, nor do the threads they generally start. I suppose that a judgement of honesty is somewhat subjective, your welcome to your opinion on that matter, and we'll have to agree to disagree.

I am more than happy to own my faults, but you are neither intimate nor savvy enough to help me find them. I assure you hypocrisy is not one of my more glaring problems; though I do admit I fall short on that matter in my own ways, but not this time.

P.S. I suppose it was my week to help feed the trolls.

Best karma users