Re: nonfree.org further debate (was Re: Need a listmaster!)
- To: email@example.com
- Subject: Re: nonfree.org further debate (was Re: Need a listmaster!)
- From: Ioannis <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Sat, 10 Jul 1999 23:06:55 -0400
- Message-id: <[🔎] 19990710230655.A3280@flinet.com>
- In-reply-to: <email@example.com>; from Manoj Srivastava on Fri, Jul 09, 1999 at 02:27:34PM -0500
- References: <Pine.LNX.3.96.990709115628.13991B-100000@Wakko.deltatee.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com>
I cannot refuse to object, while breath and speech remain in me, when
while being present, a free-only computer is ill regarded of and not
lifting up a hand in its defense.
The cause of this motivation arises from the present discussion when
we discovered how astonished we were to find that of all the professing
developers of free-software -- beginning with the ancient heroes,
and ending with the developers of today -- no one has ever blamed
free-software or praised non-free software except with a view to the glories,
honors, and benefits which flow from them. No one has adequately described
the true nature of either of them abiding in the soul; or shown
that of all the things of a man's soul which he has within him, a free-only
computer when treated with respect is always preferable than a non-free
computer. For if this was not true, the computer would be merely an object
of convenience, grossly, as I conceive, perverting its true nature.
I hold that free-only software are in the class of goods
which we desire, indeed, for their results, but in a far greater
degree for their own sake --like sight or hearing or knowledge
or health -- I would ask you in your praise of non-free to regard
one point only: I mean the essential good and evil which free and non-free
conveys to the possessors of them. But the many are of another mind: they
think that free-only software is to be reckoned in a troublesome class, among
goods which are to be pursued for the sake of reputation,
but in themselves are disagreeable and rather to be avoided.
Let the many of the world praise non-free and censure free-only,
magnifying the rewards and honors of the one and abusing the other.
That manner of arguing which, coming from them, I am ready to tolerate,
but from you Debians who have spent your whole life in the consideration
of this question, unless I hear the contrary from your own lips,
I expect something better. And therefore, I say, not only
consider whether free can coexist with non-free, but examine what
either of them do to the possessor of them. Which makes
the one to be a good and the other an evil.