Re: Rif: [Envolution-devel] eNvolution vs Postnuke

[Scott K. <sc...@ki...>]

On Wed, 2003-06-04 at 11:50, Sjahrazad Alamsjah wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Jun 2003 08:59:13 +0200, Luca.Gioppo wrote
> > [...]
> > Lets publish a roadmap since nobody starts one I'll give a first 
> > idea to work on: [...]
> 
> I'm totally agreed with Luca. If we're concentrate more strengthen our team, 
> support, marketing etc, I'm sure our community will grow fast. We have 
> already envo network sites in some countries, this is also proven about the 
> envo added value.
> 

A roadmap already exists as well as the philosophy Envolution was
founded upon here:

http://www.envolution.com/index.php?name=Subjects&file=index&req=listpages&subid=2

> Starting arguing between pn vs envo again :) will be contra productive. Let 
> pn has its own and vice versa.

I agree that re-igniting the flames would be counter productive, but
everyine should be aware that there is a lot of FUD spreading going on
about Envolution on some sites and discussion lists.

Wouldn't it be prudent to set the record straight and make our
collective voices heard that we wish to be judged on factual information
instead of outright false statements. The bottom line is Envolution
development suffers because of this.

The opriginal title of this thread should not have been Envolution vs
PostNuke...instead it should have been:

Envolution vs FUD

Because Envolution is not competing against PostNuke or Xaraya or
PHPNuke or Xoop's et al. We compete against our own abilities and faults
and should not have to comepete against FUD from a few people who keep
spreading it.

Max is talking about setting the record straight and making our
collective voices heard. Specifically that the Envolution community
wants to be free from false and misleading statements and that we are
good open source contributing netizens.

Zoom