On 10/31/19 6:34 PM, Dmitry Alexandrov wrote: > Marcel <m...@runbox.com> wrote: >> On 10/31/19 4:11 PM, Dmitry Alexandrov wrote: >>>> On 10/31/19 3:01 PM, Dmitry Alexandrov wrote: >>>>> Marcel <m...@runbox.com> wrote: >>>>>> What I do see are volunteers trying to opportunistically derail the Free >>>>>> Software Movement at a moment of perceived weakness for RMS. I read >>>>>> concerns about the eventual death of RMS to the survival of GNU, yet RMS >>>>>> is not dead yet, and these detractors are trying to push him out while >>>>>> he's still alive. I have deep concerns about the day RMS stops being >>>>>> involved in the Free Software Movement, but that is hardly an argument >>>>>> to push him out while he's still active and involved. >>>>> >>>>> When heʼs dead, it may be too late to discuss anything. >>>>> >>>>> History teaches us, that a lifework of great leader, who neglects an >>>>> opportunity to step aside and let his successors to display themselves >>>>> while still keeping an eye on them, might go rack and ruin in a moment. >>> >>> You donʼt try say, that when ‘detractors’, that want to derail free >>> software movement (whoever you mean), wonʼt need to push him out first, >>> because heʼs already dead, it will be any better, do you? >> >> I don't understand the rest of your statement, so I cannot respond. > > Your point, as I understand it: the discussion on the future of GNU shall not > be held because: (1) there are ‘detractors’ who want to derail free software > movement, and (2) RMS is still with us. > > My point: your point is invalid, because the situation will never be better > than that: (1) ill-wishers to the free software will exist in any foreseeable > future, while (2) RMS is not. >
No, that was not my point, you misread my statement. I think we probably hold the same opinion, but I will not go into details because this list is censored and my messages are rejected without a cause. What can we discuss under conditions of censorship such as those? Will this message make it through?