Re: Social Contract GR's Affect on sarge
Scripsit Branden Robinson <email@example.com>
> I do think that some -- but by no means all -- people who want to apply
> the DFSG only to a certain subset of the works in Debian main are
> essentially "w4r3z d00dz" as I understand the term. That is, people,
> who derive pleasure from the simple accumulation of digital works,
> and/or see it as an end in itself.
I don't really think that is a good explanation. I have not noticed
any instances of the mentality you describe here. Rather, the vibe I
get is mostly something like
a) Non-free equals EVIL
b) Package <FOO> is really nifty and does not feel evil to me.
c) A lot of users feel that <FOO> is a necessary thing to have.
d) If we apply the DFSG consistently, <FOO> will end up in non-free.
e) That will make the users from (c) add non-free to their sources.list
f) By (a), adding non-free to sources.list is an EVIL deed.
g) Thus, applying the DFSG consistently will result in Debian
inciting people to do EVIL, which is EVIL in itself.
h) Plus, users with a proper sense of morals will switch from Debian
to some other OS, where they can get <FOO> without being EVIL.
Pinpointing the flaws in this argumentation is left as an exercise for
Henning Makholm "What a hideous colour khaki is."