Now this is the sort of thing that pisses me off. I recently saw an article on the cover of a Linux mag that had a huge tabloid headline - Distro Wars - or some such.
It was essentially about how Suse is trying to do better in the States. And there seems to be a proliferation of best distro arguments going on. I don't care. For a start I don't care if you use Linux, Unix, OS/2, BE, Chaos, ADA, etc. etc.
What I do care about is that the people who need to use an OS use one that is sutable for them. I disregard Windows because it is made by a company whose business ethics appear to me to be the worst of any company in the world.
Linux distributions all have the same basic underpinnings, so you should choose the one ideal to you. Or indeed use something else. For example if you need to use high end analysis then you should use ADA, creative graphics, maybe Mac, hard number crunching has to be UNIX, control interface then OS/2 is a better bet.
And of course some Linux distros have a differing philosophy, so you should use one that fits for you.
Essentially I will not support an Operating system that is too heavy on the wizards. Dependancy on a GUI is the biggest no no in computing, it has no need to be there. And supply of source code is essential. I do not and have never believed that any company has the right to refuse you the source code of a program you have purchased.
What do I care about voting? Why should I vote for a distro. I will vote with my wallet and my connection. I will support those companies who offer me what I require. I am also fundamentally opposed to monopolies - I believe in the competitive spirit and open governence, I do not believe in tyranny and control. If a distro ever starts to be a monopoly, either within or without the Linux fold I will use something else.