> You can easily be undercut. If you're successful selling FOSS, it's because you've made it really easy for your customers, been really helpful to them, or bec

> You can easily be undercut. If you're successful selling FOSS, it's because you've made it really easy for your customers, been really helpful to them, or because they want to pay you because they like you, probably because they know you're putting work in. What you are mincing words about here is the fact that no, you are not selling software, you are receiving voluntary donations. It's the same rhetoric as always "Um akshually you can sell Free Software" when what is meant is "You can put it up for sale". I am not obliged to humour it, so I will not. > supplying corporations with free labor in return for nothing. As opposed to FOSS, which is currently ... Coping and Seething in this thread about receiving nothing in return. It ain't a ploy. We just don't care if corporations use it. > The problem is trying to benefit from the concept without actually believing in it, and failing. The point of Free Software is that people have access to the software that runs the machines that their lives depend on. The point of Open Source is to supply free labor to others in order to hopefully get attention, praise, or simply personal satisfaction. The word for that is "cult".