Re: calling firmware code data is not being honest with ourselves, includes counterproposal and RFC on a possible Amendment (Was: Proposal: The DFSG do not require source code for data, including firmware)

[Sven Luther <sven.luther@wanadoo.fr>]

On Thu, Aug 24, 2006 at 01:25:33AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 24, 2006 at 09:25:20AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 24, 2006 at 12:15:40AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > > Whether you consider sourceless firmware to be non-free or not, changing
> > > "sourceless" to "non-free" is a change of scope.
> 
> > Indeed, you pass from word nit-picking and duisguising the truth to saying
> > things squarely as they are.
> 
> I see that, as usual, your very small brain doesn't afford you the luxury
> of having a rational discussion about this subject without resorting to
> insulting anyone who doesn't agree with you.  My pity for your mental
> handicap is stretched to its limits; please find a proxy with better command
> of social interaction if you have anything further to say to me on this
> subject, because I won't be reading or replying to your posts from here on.

It is interesting to note that both Joey and Manoj both interpret your GR the
same way as me, and even Overfiend recent post confort me in that opinion.

Maybe, just maybe, it could be that you are the one who is wrong in this, and
even though i said that you where nit-picking and i feel that your GR wording
is trying to disguise the non-freeness of firmware with clever word-chosing, i
didn't insult you in the way you did above. 

You are not able to convince with rational arguments, so resort to insult
against people not thinking your way, how sad.

Friendly,

Sven Luther