Following the Microsoft model

Summary: Quick clarifications regarding a smear campaign that's waged against Techrights by Mono proponents

IF TECHRIGHTS does not cover Mono as much as it used to, it's because Mono is not much of a burning issue. It's not that it's any safer or more reasonable to use, it's just that nobody cares about it anymore and it gradually gets abandoned (the only Mono program we have been hearing about lately is SparkleShare [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7]). The Mono project was very active in 2007-2008 and in 2009 the FSF poured cold water on it.

The Mono program which infects more GNU/Linux distributions than anything else is Tomboy. An article has just been published about a "Tomboy To Zim Wiki Conversion Script" and it is also possible to migrate Tomboy data to Gnote. It's not so hard to avoid Mono anymore. Even Ubuntu is reducing its dependence on Mono, over time.

Many factors have contributed to the demise of Mono, which is the first thing people uninstall when they set up a GNU/Linux-powered machine. The Mono hopefuls are still trying to label Mono problems "myths" and as the comments in Linux Today ought to show, GNU/Linux users just aren't buying it.

It sure seems like outside the echo chamber of "I admire everything Microsoft" land there is no trust in Mono. Why should there be? Microsoft has been suing and extorting companies for using Microsoft APIs. Why should Mono be treated differently? Besides, Mono only helps .NET become a de facto standard. How is that helpful to GNU/Linux?

“Many factors have contributed to the demise of Mono, which is the first thing people uninstall when they set up a GNU/Linux-powered machine.”As we pointed out before, Mono boosters and Microsoft apologists organise themselves as they attack all sceptics and critics of Mono [1, 2], even polite sites like Groklaw. Sometimes the tactics used are particularly distasteful and they include intimidation, cursing, even libel. Anonymous Novell employees got involved in it too, by commenting in this Web site. The person behind "Mono mythbusting", a self-appointed spokesman for Mono, has been one of the worst in that regard. Last year he wrote an article where he referred to anonymous comments from Techrights, making them appear like the site's actual position/article content. Why? So that the site can be described as "radical" (cherry-picking radical comments, not editrials). The same Mono bully is now collecting lines of text from anonymous IRC participants as though they represent the positions of this Web site. That is a deliberate distortion which is intended to daemonise based on misattribution.

Don't trust what Mono apologists are saying. Many of them are shameless, foul-mouthed liars and stalkers. They also spend a fair amount of time bullying those who link to Techrights and spreading false characterisations. What motivates them and Novell staff to do all of this if not the necessity of gagging opposition and silencing opposing views? The worship of Mono sometimes looks worse than adherence to Apple or Scientology. ⬆