Mozilla 1.0 Release Parties 370
Screaming Lunatic writes "With the release of Mozilla 1.0 almost here, the open source Mozilla community is planning a bunch of parties all over the world. You can choose to attend a party already planned somewhere in the world or start up a party in your own neck of the woods. The main party will be at 8pm Wednesday, June 12, 2002 at the DNA Lounge in San Francisco." Currently 37 parties
listed, but many of them look awfully lonely... none near Ann Arbor yet ;)
No party... but capitolism (Score:3, Interesting)
I hope to get at least another 100 people using OO and Moz and away from microsoft products...
I have an excellent banner for my booth too..
Hey, if you aren't being an advocate... then you're just dead weight.
Re:parties for a web browser? (Score:1, Interesting)
Irony... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Don't start chilling the champagne just yet... (Score:2, Interesting)
Mozilla_Release_version(t)=1.0-exp(-t*num_dev)
None near Anne Arbor yet... (Score:3, Interesting)
Unlike most people, you have the forum to get the interest in and you can write it off as a business expense!
Seriously - if you want to see a party nearby, MAKE ONE!
(of course, one wonders about the sort of people who would go to a Mozilla release party... will there be many "wimmin of the female persuasion" as a certain squint-eyed sailor might ask...)
Activities? (Score:4, Interesting)
But I'm at a loss to think of other activities. Suggestions?
Is this appropriate? (Score:3, Interesting)
Is it really appropriate that Mozilla be celebrated at the DNA Lounge?
For those of you not aware, the DNA Lounge is owned by Jamie Zawinski (aka JWZ), a former Netscape employee. When things weren't going his way, JWZ made a very high-profile exit [jwz.org] from Netscape Communications and from the Mozilla project. He was very rude about it; he had very harsh words about Netscape's newer employees, he pushed all of the same FUD arguments that MS mouthpieces such as ZDnet tend to do, and he basically declared the project a failure.
JWZ's high-profile registration was a big setback for Mozilla, because it lowered morale inside the team and served as a huge negative PR piece.
Now that Mozilla has successfully reached its 1.0 release, they're going to celebrate by paying JWZ for booze and entertainment? Is this the way to reward the person who did more to hurt the Mozilla project than any other single person in the industry?
Perhaps I'm just being curmudgeonly about this, but I really don't think it's appropriate. Mozilla succeeded despite JWZ.
IE is an ActiveX control (Score:4, Interesting)
I bet they could use some of that Mozilla code in IE7! MS Mozilla!
You too can use the Gecko engine (Mozilla's rendering engine) in Microsoft Internet Explorer. Use this tool [www.iol.ie] to patch iexplore.exe and other apps to use an ActiveX wrapper around the Gecko engine instead of MSHTML.
Re:Well, (Score:3, Interesting)
* Drool over me 'cause I'm pretty, plus I run gentoo
Now, what about worshipping such a woman? I know of one who is a proto-geek, and I think the absolute world of her. With some patience, and some luck, I'll marry her someday. So, I'm trying to learn everything I can to avoid putting her off, and am worried that, by thinking too highly of her, I might make her desire to leave (this is just one of my worries, and a new one to boot, since I read your post). Care to shed some insight for a hopeful soul?
Re:Well, arghh.. (Score:2, Interesting)
anyone for a game of russian roulette?
They either love you or hate you. If you love 'em they will love to hate you, and if you hate 'em they will love to love you. Its all bout love right.
ohh well to hell with it, if you just pretend to love me I'll fuck you. Just be honest and keep me confused, else I'll get bored and replace you.
welcome to the game of love. pull, but don't pull too hard at the wrong time unless they need you to which they neglect to say when. push, but don't push too hard.
One thing is for sure, you'll never for sure know when to do what.
Fiver-rah, I respect you. Your sex really rules our minds. Fiver-rah, I accept you, but damn I want my beer.
Re:Well, (Score:2, Interesting)
Now, about this party--it's 21 and over. A lot of those whiny boys are just that--high school kids and what not. They probably won't be at the party, cause guys that whine about gurls don't tend to go to parties anyway!
On behalf of all the decent guys on
Re:Booth Babes? (Score:1, Interesting)
Don't bother looking for red latex, though. My hair's green now, and it makes me look like the Christmas daemonette.
- Ceren, who's not really a boothgirl anymore, but though this would be funny. uggh. sleep dep.
FreeBSD's Strange Attractor.
Re:Well, arghh.. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:The release party flyer invitation (Score:3, Interesting)
OT, but the answer is simple; because teens in the 70s messed up, and "ruined" it for future teens.
In case you are unaware, people made this same argument after the Korean and Vietnam wars. Eventually, people started listening. In the early 1970's, 28 states in the USA lowered the drinking age from 21 to 18. This was raised back to 21 in the 1980s.
Why, you may ask?
Because drunk-driving accidents, public drunkenness, and alcohol-influenced fighting increased almost immediately, and steadily climbed in the 18-20 year old age bracket. Some states had increases of over 25% in the first year alone. In fact, the US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration estimates that changing the minimum drinking age laws to 21 years of age have saved over 16,000 lives since 1975.
18 year olds had their chance in this country, and they blew it. I'd be very surprised if the legal age was ever lowered again.