Just a few follow-up bits on the GNOME/GNU split story.
Misrepresentin’
It’s always sadly amusing to me that people insist on (maliciously?) twisting and misrepresenting RMS. They try it in comments here (and all around) the intertubes, and even on the very mailing list in which he participates:
Richard, as a GNOME member, suggested that we forbid any mention of proprietary software on planet GNOME.
[rms]
Nobody suggested that as far as I know. I certainly did not.
This is just another vivid example of the “RMS doesn’t even want people acknowledging proprietary software” lie that some people are trying to push. (Someone tries it here on this blog.)
Another example:
As a specific example, to the question, “Do you agree that viewing
proprietary software as ‘illegitimate’, ‘immoral’, ‘antisocial’ and/or
‘unethical’ should be a pre-condition for syndication on Planet GNOME?”, so
far 151 respondents have answered “No”, only 19 have answered “Yes”. That’s
about an 8-to-1 ratio.[rms]
That goes far beyond what I said, and I would not propose it. It
seems that a significant minority have views on this issue much
stronger than mine.What worries me is that you presented this question inaccurately here
as pertaining to my views. The readers here have seen what I said and
can see the difference. But if you said the same thing elsewhere,
that would constitute misrepresenting my views to the public.
And just one more:
Non-free software can’t even be “favorably mentioned”?
[rms]
My second suggestion was to post an official GNOME response when it is
favorably mentioned. My previous suggestion was for a rule
about a much narrower case.It seems you’ve grafted part of one onto part of the other, and now
you’re criticizing a combination which nobody proposed.
Listen people, you don’t have to agree with RMS. He’s not a god or infallible. Just stop lying about the man and what he says. Just stop lying.
If it only happened once or twice, I would be generous and assume it wasn’t malicious. But it is constant, and seems to come too easy to be an honest misunderstanding. I’m tired of trying to determine if a person is misrepresenting RMS because they are a malicious liar, or merely an uninformed moron parroting a malicious liar. It is quickly become a distinction without a difference.
One more thing before I move on: straw man. We see you doing it. You aren’t fooling anyone. It’s disgusting, dishonest, childish and malicious. Stop it. Stop lying.
Don’t try to hide it
There is a brief (and likely to fail) proposal to move such discussion into private channels. I think it’s clear why this is a bad idea: people are already straight up lying about what is being said in the very same thread where it is said, just imagine the lies and distortions that would come out of “private” discussions!
At least with the discussion publicly archived those that take the time can read through and see the lying lies that malicious liars are lying. Shine a light on them and watch the cockroaches scurry away, I say.
This is why I always try to read original sources and always try to link to them. It’s also why I chuckle when people try to pretend like I’m making something up. It’s right there in 0s and 1s, friend. You can disagree with my analysis, but the facts are the facts.
I like “seeing the sausage made”. You can read through the mailing list and see exactly who is a troll with ulterior motives and who is actually addressing the issue. Can’t tell the players without a scorecard.
I do sympathize that such discussion can be embarassing. Guess what? Some people need to be embarassed. Those people in that thread that are straight-up lying and misrepresenting RMS? They need to be embarassed.
A large part of the problem is that they aren’t embarassed: not embarassed to lie, not embarassed to misrepresent; and not embarassed to construct straw men and push polls. They should be embarassed, and the GNOME foundation should be embarassed by having them as participants.
Recent Comments