Re: [was A possible GFDL compromise] documentation eq software ?
On 2003-08-29 14:28:54 +0100 Mathieu Roy <yeupou@gnu.org> wrote:
> MJ Ray <markj@cloaked.freeserve.co.uk> a tapoté :
>> 1/ The statement that you were objecting to here does not use "we"
>> at all, so defining "we" is irrelevant.
> I replied to Josselin who wrote the following:
> "If providing any sort of crap _we_ can was a service to our
> users, there wouldn't be any DFSG.
> _We_ believe providing a non-free manual is a disservice to
> our users. If they can't modify it freely, and can't put it on
> their encrypted filesystem, _we_ feel it is not suitable for
> them."
You addressed that elsewhere in your email, in a rather rude tone, I think, and I did not take issue with it. Please try to read your own emails! That was not relevant to my reply to your claim that it was inaccurate to state "readers of this list...&c".
Also, in the part you quote, there may be two different groups represented by the "we" in the two paragraphs. I know it is difficult for some people to accept that a person can be a member of multiple groups, but you're smarter than that.
> If you are not capable to read carefully mails you are talking about
> before pretending "this is irrelevant", I do not believe the rest of
> you mail can be of any interest. Sorry.
That's your choice, but I am very surprised by it. After all, you are the person with the URL of an appeal to excuse misinterpretations in your signature. If you will not listen to explanations of what you seem to have misinterpreted, how can we help you to understand? You did seem to start quoting an irrelevant dictionary definition back at me and I think it was fair to comment on the insult. I am a native speaker and I do know the first person plural (and when I'm unsure, language texts are on the bookcases here...).
Maybe you just don't like the idea that some documentation is also software (=~= there is a non-empty intersection between the sets of documentation and software) and this is a convenient way to avoid it?
--
MJR/slef My Opinion Only and possibly not of any group I know.
Reply to: