<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 1:43 PM, David Brodbeck <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:gull@gull.us">gull@gull.us</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="im">Phill Wiggin wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
However; I, for one, won't use your theme because of the non-free font, not because of the license you chose for the theme itself. I'm no cheapskate, but the longer I use Linux, the more of a 'FOSS Snob' I become. But even before then, I refused to pay for fonts.<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
The problem is the best, most common fonts are usually not free-as-in-speech. At best they're free-as-in-beer. There are a lot of free novelty fonts, not so many free body fonts that look good. That's why so many people end up downloading Microsoft's font pack when they install Linux.<br>
<br>
I think good but pedestrian-looking fonts just aren't something the FOSS community considers "fun," and in FOSS if it's not fun for someone it doesn't get done.<div><div></div><div class="h5"><br></div>
</div></blockquote><div><br>Yup, I don't disagree with any of your points. But, they miss the original focus of the conversation.<br><br>This new theme requires a for-pay ($15?) font, and due to the licensing (I assume) of the theme there are no modifications allowed. E.g. No finding a font that you consider "good enough" and using that.<br>
<br>Maybe I'm just not a font person. As long as it doesn't look awful, I'm pretty content with even the free-as-in-speech fonts. If none of those work, I'll go for free-as-in-beer. But a font, to me, is not something that's really worth paying for.<br>
<br></div></div>