After takin' a swig o' grog, David Kastrup belched out this bit o' wisdom: >> Let RMS post himself. > > To change the tune (but not the gist) of the hysterics of a > pseudonymous well-known troll? Come off it.
So you are saying that Karl, on behalf of Richard, deliberately responded to a well-known troll? Are you calling them troll-feeders? > Of course you would give > damn about the veracity of any source, including RMS himself. Karl is > the president of probably the largest international user group for a > particular piece of free software (TeX). Only a lunatic would think > he'd impersonate RMS. But you are a self-proclaimed lunatic, anyway, > as expressed in your pseudonym behind which you hide. Logic isn't your strong suit, is it? For what it is worth, my real name is made evident in my headers. I made the mistake of using my real name and e-mail address, and all it bought me was a ton of spam. Hence the obfuscation. > Why should anybody bother about the insinuations of a troll? I don't know. Why ARE you bothering? Why did RMS (through his proxy, Karl), bother? Given the evidence presented, my doubts about the nature of Karl's post have been somewhat lessened. However, I have even less doubt that "Karen Hill" is enjoying this exchange immensely. -- Q: Why does a GNU/Linux user compile his compiler? A: Because he can. _______________________________________________ Gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
