Re: A possible GFDL compromise

[Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>]

    > I think you have demonstrated, better than I ever could,
    > that your criticism is based on an unfair standard.

    It isn't unfair, precisely because I think it's a two way street.
    This is the standard that applies to both sides.

This "standard" is an indirect way of claiming you are entitled to
demand answers from me.  (If I don't give you the answers you want,
then my discussion is "not serious".)

I think that if we want to have a serious discussion, rather than a
volly of attacks, we should not approach it with a belligerent
attitude.

						      Are there questions
    you think Debian hasn't answered?

The question is moot, because I am not demanding answers from Debian,
only presenting arguments for Debian developers to consider.  None
of us is entitled to demand answers from the others.

But if we imagine that we were all entitled to demand answers from
each other, the fact is that those arguing against me here outnunmber
me.  They appear to have, each of them, more time available for this
than I do.  A "standard" which requires me to match them point for
point would be unfair in the circumstances.

    Has Debian announced that it will
    ignore whatever you say because you have been cruel and dismissive
    towards us?

I have not been cruel to anyone in this discussion, so the question is
moot.  But if I were cruel to someone, no one could blame him for
deciding not to speak with me further.  Even if a person felt I merely
dismissed him, I don't see how he could be faulted for not speaking
with me further.

I will drop this thread here.  That way I may be able to turn some
attention to other messages in which other people have raised more
substantive issues.