Re: General Resolution: Removing non-free
On Mon, Jul 17, 2000 at 08:21:09PM -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
> > > Your assertion is blatantly false. I did not propose it to appease
> > > the FSF; I frankly think that their proposals (hiding the existinance
> > > of non-free) are off-base and wrong. I brought it because I believe
> > > that the CURRENT policy does not have the interests of the free
> > > software community at heart.
> >
> > It might be patently false, but it definitely can't be blatantly false. Why
>
> Both, really.
Actions speak louder than words.
> > bring up the FSF at all if this isn't about them? Maybe it wasn't you who
> > brought them up, but several of your supporters have asserted that the "Free
> > Software Community", as mentioned in the Social Contract, in fact refers to
> > the FSF.
>
> I never attempted to make such a statement, and I am not aware of
> anyone else that did either.
I can't find the posts now in the archive, so perhaps someone said it on IRC.
Either way, I find it odd that you are concentrating on this part of the
discussion (and indeed, selected this particular item of the discussion to
continue, over a month later) instead of disputing the many valid points that
have been voiced by your opponents in this debate.
--Adam
Reply to: