[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Inconsistencies in our approach



On Sat, Aug 16, 2003 at 03:07:37AM +0900, Fedor Zuev wrote:
> 	Maybe. But there also another element in the picture. For
> GFDL. This is a not a random package from the random source with the
> random licence. This is a licence from Stallman, the inventor of the
> term "free software" and creator of the free software movement.
> There is no reason to think that Stallman is an idiot and can not
> see these semi-trivial arguments, presented here against GFDL.
> Contrary, in the past Stallman so many times was right, in very
> pragmatical sense of "right", whereas virtually everyone else was
> wrong, so he shall be far more credible than random subscriber of
> debian-legal. So, it may as well be seen as the test case for the
> DFSG as for the GFDL.

When I looked up "Appeal to Authority" in my _Basic Logical Fallacies_
textbook, I saw the above.

-- 
G. Branden Robinson                |     Don't use nuclear weapons to
Debian GNU/Linux                   |     troubleshoot faults.
branden@debian.org                 |     -- US Air Force Instruction 91-111
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |

Attachment: pgpjySloTu9q9.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: