08.10
So, I am not sure if I should feel honoured or not (I am tentatively going for ‘not’) about the request to debate this Lunduke fellow on his show. Did I ‘diss’ him? It feels like we are incredibly uncool rappers or something. Not that I’ve watched it – I hadn’t heard of the guy before that point – but I have no real idea what he wants to debate.
The strange thing is reading his blog I can’t see any point that our opinions diverge significantly, such as:
his post on ‘freedom’, my post on ‘freedom’ – I say that the FOSS license excludes small developers, he says he’s a small developer that tried (and failed) at open sourcing.
My main gripe with Linux, which the commenter FBM gets, is that the community is largely a bunch of argumentative newbies who are intent on a almost religious level of promotion and who refuse to hear a bad word about their OS.
Anyway, I’ll go on your show provided you can answer the following:
1. Where do we actually diverge in opinion. You say you want to debate, but what about?
2. Find me three examples of constructive criticism of Linux on a public, semi mainstream Linux forum that a: isn’t a flamewar and b: that the answers are not all largely YouDontNeedThat ™ and c: the developers of the software actually read.
Since I’ve never yet seen someone complete 2. I reckon I am safe. 
Don’t mind Lunduke, he’s just some schmuck who thinks using his real name makes him special, and sports that “privacy/anonymity are for peo^H^H^H cowards with something to hide” attitude, though I’m sure he’d deny it if ever confronted.
Even at that, it’s just a thinly veiled front for a desperate grab for attention and publicity for his show that nobody watches, which in turn, is also a thinly veiled grab for attention.
I’ve always thought that splashing your real name all over the place was kinda bizarre. Who I am is entirely irrelevant to everything here and only really relevant if you plan on getting personal.
I’ve hosted many a website and released a lot of code without using my real name – not through ‘cowardice’ but because it’s never occurred to me to use it.
I don’t see much of a point to it either – putting a name, or face, to the alias doesn’t change the argument, the identity is irrelevant.
It’s just people play the “cowardice” card when faced with an argument they don’t like and can’t refute. Either that, or they’re after fame, and imho, looking for “fame” through a Linux blog says a lot more about that person, than it does about someone who doesn’t fancy plastering their name everywhere.
Seeing as how your viewpoints don’t really diverge very much overall, aside from perhaps Lunduke being Diet-LH and you being somewhere in between (and much more adept at the writing and conveying an idea aspect), and he wants to debate and on his show, no less, just screams “attention whore” to me. You don’t generally “debate” when there’s no diverging viewpoint. There just isn’t anything to debate.
The fact that he’s got to harass and “challenge” people to get anyone on his show also underscores his complete lack of originality and shows just how uncreative, uninteresting and unworthwhile he and his show are, too.
Deja vu;
Here’s an episode of the Computer Chronicles circa 1985, about Unix.
It’s funny how nothing has changed; it was about to “take over” the dominance of MS-DOS.
Especially hilarious is how the hosts ask the purveyors of Unix “why would I want to use this” and the Unix-types could only say, “but we can make it look just like [insert OS name]“.
The hosts then ask if that’s all it has going for it, and if that’s the case, why they would choose it over the OS that is being copied.
Be sure to check out the anti-Unix editorial section at 21:54
http://www.archive.org/details/UNIX1985