Re: Access to Conference

[James Love <love@cptech.org>]

  Matthew's points are well taken.  As indicated earlier, and users who
  can get to the conference and who don't have funding for the fee should
  drop a note to Donna Colvin (dcolvin@essential.org), and she will make
  sure they will get a ticket.
  
  The second point, regarding the organization of the conference itself,
  it a more difficult problem to solve at this point.  I think Matthew's
  suggestions for longer term planning, opportunities for debate about a
  program agenda, structured opportunities for participation, are very
  good.  We'll have to see what can be done at this Conference, and think
  about a longer term strategy.    Jamie
  
  
  Matthew Benjamin wrote:
  > 
  > At least one person on this list has asked why there seems to be no
  > provision for providing inexpensive registration for members of
  > non-profit groups, such as his Linux Users' Group.
  > 
  > I believe this raises a more general point:  If this conference is about
  > providing consumer alternatives to the Microsoft monopoly, then why is
  > it ignoring obvious opportunities to solicit, formally, the opinions of
  > the literally millions of advocates of non-aligned supporters of Free
  > Software, Linux, FreeBSD, the WWW, etc?
  > 
  > For instance, how were the participants in this conference selected?
  > Was there a call for papers or panel suggestions?
  > 
  > When was this conference announced?  How long did people have to arrange
  > financing, absence from work, etc?
  > 
  > If I pay my $500.00 to attend the conference, in what sort of framework
  > will I be able to participate?  How will the messages of those not in
  > some celebrity anti-Microsoft factions be heard?
  > 
  > Last week, I sent messages to both of the email addresses listed on the
  > Appraising Microsoft web site, politely requesting information on ways
  > to participate in the conference--I never got a response.
  > 
  > Forgive me if I sound agitated.  As a software developer living the
  > nightmare of doing "Only Microsoft" every day, this means a great deal
  > to me, as it must to many others who find their way to this list.
  > 
  > To us, Mr. Nader's conference is the first--perhaps it will be the
  > only--real popular endorsement of our views.  We are burned by the irony
  > of going unheard, unlistened to, in an era of unprecedented access to
  > communications media.  _That_ is the damage being done by the Microsoft
  > monoply.  _That_ is why all this matters, IMHO.
  > 
  > We don't dare miss this chance to be heard.
  > 
  > Matthew Benjamin
  > Developer, Comshare, Inc.
  > 
  > --My views certainly do not represent the views of Comshare, Inc.  --
  
  -- 
  James Love | Center for Study of Responsive Law
  P.O. Box 19367 | Washington, DC 20036 | http://www.cptech.org
  voice 202.387.8030 | fax 202.234.5176 | love@cptech.org