First off i am not saying it should be free in every sense of the word, that would be chaos. Structure is good,and also i don't think anyone feels forced to contribute artwork to Ubuntu. We are all here by choice, because we choose Ubuntu out of the hundreds of Linux distros to apply our individual talents to in an effort to shape the feature. Ubuntu with the tag line "Linux for Human beings" is made by people for people. Not just people of one race or people of one religion, not just people who use gimp and not photoshop or photoshop and not gimp. By decrementing against people who want to use one type of software as, in essence nothing more than an interface to convert there vision into something tangible. It seams to me, would just alienate people who are great artists with great vision but are set in there ways. art after all really has nothing to do with what brush you use, and everything to do with the people making and seeing it.
i digress and my only real after thought to this is if we keep up this discussion which seems to be practice a lot of circular logic we will never get anything done On Sun, Apr 12, 2009 at 1:36 AM, Thorsten Wilms <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sat, 2009-04-11 at 22:01 -0700, David Holland wrote: > > > Well i guess the question is > > What does ubuntu stand for ? > > > > Freedom > > > > or > > > > Restrections (windows tm) > > > > > > Freedom to do what you want, create what you want as long as no one > > gets hert and we vote on everything > > > > Restricted we tell you what you can and cant do no voting you pay for > > everything > > > No, that doesn't follow and is so simplistic that it misses any point. > > > -- > Thorsten Wilms > > thorwil's design for free software: > http://thorwil.wordpress.com/ > > > -- > ubuntu-art mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art > -- Thanks D.Holland
-- ubuntu-art mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art
