Of those GNOME members
- 6 (17.6%) are members of the FSF
- 21 (60%) of these respondents say that they routinely use the term "Linux" when referring to "an operating system based on a Linux kernel, etc."; 8 (22.9%) use "GNU/Linux", and 6 (17.1%) use some other term (including the interesting alternative of "Leftux"in one instance—I guess this respondent will be easy to spot should he-or-she be attending GUADEC)
- When limited to the two alternatives, 25 (71.4%) chose "Linux" and 10 (28.6%) chose "GNU/Linux".
When given four potential focuses to prioritize for the Board, GNOME members ranked the alternatives as follows:
| Focus | Most Important | More Important | Less Important | Least Important | Average Score |
| Overseeing the GNOME 3 road map | 10 (30.3%) | 13 (39.4%) | 8 (24.2%) | 2 (8.1%) | 2.94 |
| Building better bridges to corporate users of GNOME technologies | 8 (25.8%) | 12 (38.7%) | 7 (22.6%) | 4 (12.9%) | 2.77 |
| Providing technical oversight and direction | 7 (24.1%) | 7 (24.1%) | 10 (34.5%) | 5 (17.2%) | 2.55 |
| Educating users about the FSF's views on software freedom | 6 (17.6%) | 3 (8.8%) | 7 (20.6%) | 18 (52.9%) | 1.91 |
Obviously, the more Foundation members who participate, the more authoritative the survey will be: the current number of respondents represents perhaps 1 in 10 Foundation members. If you haven't participated yet, please take a moment to do so.
Since I'm mainly interested in this issue as it affects the foundation-list and Board activities, I'm not reporting the overall totals at this point, but will do so once I've gotten what seem to be a large enough number of responses to be indicative of something.
Let's please remember that this was raised as an specific issue to prospective Board candidates by Mr. Stallman, a Foundation member, prior to the election. Head-shaking and moans of "Not again!" seem entirely inappropriate, unless our method of dealing with divisive issues is pretending that they simply don't exist....
