Re: LGPL module linked with a GPL lib
On Wed, 2005-08-03 at 15:21 -0700, Michael K. Edwards wrote:
> No, I just explained where I was coming from in characterizing RMS's
> public posture as "preach[ing] the economic superiority of the free
> software system". How you can call this an attempt to shut down the
> debate is beyond me. If you think it's a "grievous error" to use the
> word "economics" for an inquiry into the conformability of RMS's
> expectations about GPL "enforcement" with the balance of public and
> private interests embodied in the law, then it is an error from which
> I have no wish to recover.
I consider it a "grievous error" to claim that RMS "preach[es] the
economic superiority of the free software system". You were not calling
for an inquiry of any kind in that statement; you were simply snarking.
And you were called out for making an incorrect statement.
What I'm curious about now is why you felt the need to blather about the
nature of ethics and economics, instead of just letting the stupid
comment go, and then get even more defensive when someone points out the
absurdity of your blathering.
You are, of course, free to refuse to admit error, just as we are free
to draw whatever conclusions we might from your refusal. But I'm
curious to see how far this rabbit hole goes.