There has been a lot of pro-Mono and anti-Mono arguments assaulting the community of late. The debate is not new but both sides have taken up arms since some distributions have decided to either remove Mono or include Mono by default.

Signs indicating that C# is not catching on raise questions about the essence of Mono

When you think mono, you think tired. You think sleepy. You think shut-yourself-up-in-your-bedroom-for-two-weeks-and-snooze-like-Rip-Van-Winkle. You get the idea. But that is not how it should be. Mono isn’t boring. Mono should excite people!

Mono-Nono's opinion on bad treatment of Mono dissenters and Mono resistance from Groklaw

As criticism of Novell's Mono keeps rising, Mono entanglements seemingly continue to spread further (even in a KDE distribution)

Those who dislike Mono to the extent that, they would like to avoid mono based software as best as they can, are getting larger everyday. But when you install a software you never know if it contains Mono or not. That is where Mononono(sounds real funny, eh?) comes in. Mononono creates an intentional conflict with mono packages and thus making it easy.

A few weeks ago I posted how I was considering a new look at Mono and .net technology. I mean I have heard the claims by the other side about patent FUD. So cast aside litigation fears for using .net technology, after all it is an open standard right?

In short, we are in an adversarial situation. Microsoft does not want us to succeed. Thus we cannot trust Microsoft, even if we'd like to, and must consider Mono based upon the question "What is the worst thing MS can reasonably do?". We can only trust Mono if we are convinced Microsoft doesn't have weasel room. The current situation appears, to me, to have lots of weasel room.

A reader believes that an application which promotes .NET/Mono might be marketed to GNU/Linux-using public some time in the future now that the GIMP is removed from Ubuntu, due to another Mono application