Re: non-free and users?
On 2004-01-19 18:44:23 +0000 Sven Luther <sven.luther@wanadoo.fr>
wrote:
On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 03:53:31PM +0000, MJ Ray wrote:
First, it was offered as comment. Second, justification for why he
regards
it as unethical was given. Finally, I don't think there was
Well, slander with argumentation is still slander.
Indeed, it could be, but I think the long thread shows that he really
does regard it as unethical, in his opinion. Ultimately, most ethics
are a matter of opinion and not codified.
malice against you personally, or any other developer, as he took
Well, slander without intentions is still slander.
At least in UK law, slander is a type of "malicious falsehood", so
slander without malice cannot be.
[...] In this he is gravely
offending me, as well as any other non-free packager, and the least
would be excuses for this, and retractation of the accusation.
Fine then, say that you are gravely offended and request an apology,
but do not start throwing accusations of illegal acts around. I do not
think you are going to take him to court, so I do not understand why
you call "slander" over the list.
But then, i am not a english native speaker, i may have misunderstood,
but still i believe the intent is there, that he (and all other remove
non-free defenders here) consider my work as non-free packager, as
inferior and not worthy of mention. [...]
No, I think he considers it wrong. I am not aware of him commenting on
technical aspects of your packaging.
--
MJR/slef My Opinion Only and possibly not of any group I know.
Please http://remember.to/edit_messages on lists to be sure I read
http://mjr.towers.org.uk/ gopher://g.towers.org.uk/ slef@jabber.at
Creative copyleft computing services via http://www.ttllp.co.uk/
Reply to: