I use Debian - does that mean that I can get on a mailing list and threaten the developers: "If you don't include X feature (or exclude Y feature) I will write a nasty piece about your project?" (that kind of threat, to be true, carries more weight than what Fink threatened). That would be ridiculous in the extreme. My reaction should be one of extreme gratitude that there is a first class operating system which I can use without payment to do a lot of things without undue problems of the sort that accompany the use of some other proprietary operating sytstems (wink, wink).

A second class of FOSS project has a commercial tangent. Here the people involved may be more inclined to take note of empty threats like those which Fink made - but that kind of reaction would be from the most benevolent person in the project.

Shuttleworth put it this way: "While I appreciate the vigilance of folks who have expressed concerns on this thread, and understand that the role of Canonical within Ubuntu is such that we *must* have constant scrutiny of Canonical's decisions by the broader community, I would ask that this scrutiny itself be held to a high standard.

"This rumour and thread sprung up with no evidence of a breach of trust on the part of Canonical, and escalated into ad hominem attacks that are not in keeping with the Ubuntu code of conduct. I encourage people to ask questions of their leaders in the community, but not to slander them without evidence."

Now I'm not a big fan of Ubuntu or Shuttleworth. But one has to give the man his due - he has kickstarted a distribution that has added greatly to the popularity of Linux, increased the profile of FOSS and done it all on his own time and money. If he wants to balance the books by doing something that does not violate the licences which make FOSS what it is, let's not utter insanities and stand in his way.