Open source -- non computer topics

From: Doc <doc_at_mdrconsult.com>
Date: Sun Apr 28 10:35:49 2002

On Sat, 27 Apr 2002, James B. DiGriz wrote:
>
> P.S. Even those who disagree vehemently with Stallman respect his
> integrity, even if it's hard for some of them to understand his
> arguments (Not his fault, they include concepts difficult for some to
> grasp, which may be a blessing, all things considered, when you think
> about it.) You can't say he hasn't put his money where his mouth is.

  I don't believe that anyone who works with any unix fails to recognise
& respect Stallman's work, or his personal integrity. That includes me.
I have read his manifesto, I've read many of his interviews and
editorials, and of course I've read the General Public License. I
disagree with one single contention - his insistence that Linux should
be named after his brainchild.
  The notion that disagreement with the RMS party line denotes a failure
to understand Stallman's arguments, and the principles behind them,
doesn't follow.

  The vehemence of your replies, your over-generalization of my remarks
and my viewpoint, and your implication that anyone who disagrees with
Richard M. Stallman simply can't grasp his concepts, are together a
perfect demonstration of what I find distasteful in GNU bigotry. The
"GNU Movement" has become a cult. Its members are unable to abide any
view of its goals or its leader that doesn't hew strictly to the party
line. To raise any question or objection to _any_ of RMS's views,
actions, or demands, invites accusations of ingratitude and/or
ignorance, at the very least.

  In other words, in action if not in principle, the GNU model is
"Freedom of Information", but _not_ "Freedom of Opinion". Once again,

  "Bah!"

        Doc
Received on Sun Apr 28 2002 - 10:35:49 BST