Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men
BUT I WILL STILL GO ON SPREADING THE LIE THAT OpenBSD CONTAINS NON-FREE SOFTWARE SO PEOPLE ARE MISLEAD I never intentionally said such a thing. It was a misunderstanding, because I chose words that were subject to misinterpretation. I appreciate having been informed about the unclear statement. To prevent any further misunderstanding, I have had a clarifying note posted in the page with the interview. I don't object to general-purpose tools just for being general. How about OpenBSD ports system a general purpose tool given by developers to the users? I think the general-purpose ports system framework is fine. What I do not want to recommend are the specific ports for specific non-free programs.
Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men
On Jan 5, 2008 11:24 AM, Richard Stallman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I was a bit curious about what would someone who reads web-sites by using a wget daemon through e-mails whose own web-site looks like... well... Apache httpd 2.0.54 ((Debian GNU/Linux) DAV/2 SVN/1.2.0 PHP/4.3.10-22 mod_ssl/2.0.54 OpenSSL/0.9.7e) I use wget for personal reasons. I have nothing against running a web site. I don't endorse Debian, but I don't object to getting free software from Debian (or from OpenBSD) and installing it. BUT I WILL STILL GO ON SPREADING THE LIE THAT OpenBSD CONTAINS NON-FREE SOFTWARE SO PEOPLE ARE MISLEAD As for Subversion, I don't know why it is mentioned there, but I have nothing against using Subversion. It is free software. This continues the pattern of straw men. Over and over, people on this list criticize me for doing something which neither I nor anyone else here actually thinks is wrong. Please cut off that anyone else from the above statement. If you haven't forgotten counting then please count the no. mails you got from people who think you are wrong
Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men
On Jan 5, 2008 7:54 AM, Richard Stallman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Apache httpd 2.0.54 ((Debian GNU/Linux) DAV/2 SVN/1.2.0 PHP/4.3.10-22 mod_ssl/2.0.54 OpenSSL/0.9.7e) I have nothing against running a web site. you have *nothing* against a distribution that makes it easier to install non-free (by FSF meaning) software? then why separate to those who you recommend and those you don't? so you do have something against? then why do you use it and get benefit off it for free? I don't endorse Debian, but I don't object to getting free software from Debian (or from OpenBSD) and installing it. there is a misconception, you need to think it through more thoroughly. otherwise if it sounds like shit and it looks like shit then it must be shit (boogie nights movie) As for Subversion, I don't know why it is mentioned there, but I have nothing against using Subversion. It is free software. http://fitz.blogspot.com/2007/07/stallman-shoots-free-software-movement.html This continues the pattern of straw men. yup, you make yourself look like the straw man which needs to go to the wizard of oz to ask for a brain... Over and over, people on this list criticize me for doing something which neither I nor anyone else here actually thinks is wrong. you get criticized because you do criticize when you're not in position to do it. your principles are so fuzzy and you spin and stretch words to make them fit your agenda.
Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men
On Sat, 5 Jan 2008 12:09:16 +0200, Denis Doroshenko wrote: On Jan 5, 2008 7:54 AM, Richard Stallman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Apache httpd 2.0.54 ((Debian GNU/Linux) DAV/2 SVN/1.2.0 PHP/4.3.10-22 mod_ssl/2.0.54 OpenSSL/0.9.7e) I have nothing against running a web site. you have *nothing* against a distribution that makes it easier to install non-free (by FSF meaning) software? then why separate to those who you recommend and those you don't? so you do have something against? then why do you use it and get benefit off it for free? I don't endorse Debian, but I don't object to getting free software from Debian (or from OpenBSD) and installing it. there is a misconception, you need to think it through more thoroughly. otherwise if it sounds like shit and it looks like shit then it must be shit (boogie nights movie) As for Subversion, I don't know why it is mentioned there, but I have nothing against using Subversion. It is free software. http://fitz.blogspot.com/2007/07/stallman-shoots-free-software-movement.html This continues the pattern of straw men. yup, you make yourself look like the straw man which needs to go to the wizard of oz to ask for a brain... Over and over, people on this list criticize me for doing something which neither I nor anyone else here actually thinks is wrong. you get criticized because you do criticize when you're not in position to do it. your principles are so fuzzy and you spin and stretch words to make them fit your agenda. Thanks Denis, for a prime example of how it is not just the misc@ list that gets wishywashy BS about misremembering and lack of rigor in research (if any was done at all). Looks like the RMS MO, I'd say, but maybe it is Old Timer's Disease creeping up. Rod/ /earth: write failed, file system is full cp: /earth/creatures: No space left on device
Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men
2008/1/5, Richard Stallman [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I was a bit curious about what would someone who reads web-sites by using a wget daemon through e-mails whose own web-site looks like... well... Apache httpd 2.0.54 ((Debian GNU/Linux) DAV/2 SVN/1.2.0 PHP/4.3.10-22 mod_ssl/2.0.54 OpenSSL/0.9.7e) I use wget for personal reasons. I have nothing against running a web site. I am not playing straw person here, I was just curious. I don't endorse Debian, but I don't object to getting free software from Debian (or from OpenBSD) and installing it. Ok, it is just a bit strange to me that you are getting free software from something you don't endorse when you do endorse something else which you get also that get free software. This continues the pattern of straw men. Over and over, people on this list criticize me for doing something which neither I nor anyone else here actually thinks is wrong. In case you don't know, this _is_ a public mailing list and many people doesn't actually know you in person or even heard of you at all!! So a lot of people can only make criticism based on the words of the messages you said or posted, and straw person could occur naturally. -- Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men
On Jan 5, 2008 11:24 AM, Richard Stallman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This continues the pattern of straw men. Over and over, people on this list criticize me for doing something which neither I nor anyone else here actually thinks is wrong. Please list the names of so called straw men in your opinion and try to find out if thaty have done misleading interviews and has taken a blatantly hippocritic stand for freedom as you have and played dirty politics just for the sake of fame and revenge. If real men should be like you then I don't want to be one!
Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men
On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 10:00:55PM +, Miod Vallat wrote: Rui Miguel Silva is continually making you guys remove [EMAIL PROTECTED] from the cc's of your messages. FYI, I continually remove people from the CC on mailing-list posts. Yet you have no idea whether these people are subscribed to these mailing lists. If they are not, why do their emails get into the mailing list? Some moderator enjoys letting flames come up? That's even more interesting... I consider it rude to receive duplicate email. Isn't it rude to prevent people from receiving answers they are seeking? Not everyone not subscribed to this list will end his/her messages with a ``please cc: me as I am not subscribed'' notice, because they expect people to do the right thing. Which is ``reply to all''. Their problem. Rui -- Frink! Today is Prickle-Prickle, the 4th day of Chaos in the YOLD 3174 + No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown + Whatever you do will be insignificant, | but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi + So let's do it...?
Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men
On Jan 4, 2008 1:03 AM, Theo de Raadt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Rui Miguel Silva is continually making you guys remove from the cc's of your messages. Who knows? Perhaps He gets Paid for it, and for this violent defense of insanity from all the misused funds of FSF Otherwise why should he repeatedly say some thin that is not proprietary as proprietary even after being informed by tedu and others? === That is an OpenBSD site which has software, like for instance zangband, which is proprietary and is compiled and distributed from: ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/pub/OpenBSD/4.2/packages/i386/zangband-2.6.2p1-no_x11.tgz How many times do we have to tell you it's NOT proprietary, and It's not illegal/prohibbted to distribute Zangband. Go the hell away you troll! http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-miscm=119766148717919w=2 -Nix Fan. I used Perhaps ok? you spin doctors!! If you are going to flame rms, it is best to keep him cc'd. From: Rui Miguel Silva Seabra Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2008 12:48 PM To: Openbsd Misc (E-mail) Subject: Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 12:05:37PM -0500, Stuart VanZee wrote: Wow... it is incredibly telling that you chose a game, a pretty obscure one at that as far as I can tell, to base your argument on. The world will fall because OpenBSD recommends that people install a game... a game that is free to copy and use for non- commercial use (I looked it up), and you had to go through almost the ENTIRE package collection all the way to the Zs before you could find such a pitiful example. Because they are such pitiful cases, they could be easily removed and remove Stallman's objections to list OpenBSD at the recommended Free Software operating systems, right? More promotion of OpenBSD would be good, right? CASE... not cases, you have come up with one CASE. One example, IF I chose to believe in your modification of the original statement that sparked this thread (which I don't) and believe that Mr. Stallman was speaking of non-free software in packages your side of the argument gets smaller and smaller. See what happens when you have to prove your argument? It all boils down to you having an issue with ONE package. A game at that. Not production software, or a web browser, or an email package, a game. A single game that, from the tone of your argument must be destroying all that free software stands for. Guess what... I read the license text for that game and it sounds exactly like what your precious GPL would say if it was boiled down to it's most basic components. You can have the source code... You can modify the source code... You just can't use the source code for your commercial application. Sound familiar? That is almost exactly what I was told by a GPL Zealot that the GPL lic was all about when I was first introduced to Linux so many years ago. So your example of why OpenBSD isn't free is a farce. It wouldn't bother me if the OpenBSD devs decided to axe that package. If I wanted to use it I could install it from ports just fine, I usually do anyway, but the argument that they should do so to fit yours or Mr Stallman's ideals of what free software is about are wrong on so many levels. It comes down to trying to force others to live by your ideals. It's just like the christian croud thinking that it's ok to discriminate against the pagans because it would take such a small thing for them (us) to convert to christianity. Never mind that many of us pagans view christianity as a violent death cult, so why would we ever want to. You say that it would be such a small thing for the OpenBSD project to do to live up to your ideals when it comes to free software but quite frankly, I think that many of the OpenBSD crowd think that your ideals are wrong. Freedom is all about freedom of choice, If that means people choose non-free software on OpenBSD at least they are using OpenBSD which is in itself free software. OpenBSD with ALL the non-free software from ports (yes, really ports) would still be a much more free system than any Windows system using as much free apps as a person could find for it. Stopping this childish-tantrum regarding the FSF would also be very much more productive. childish-tantrum? You know, when you resort to attacking the character of the other persons argument rather than argue the facts of your case it means you have pretty much lost the debate and have nothing more to say. This discussion all started because Mr. Stallman very publicly stated that OpenBSD was non-free and distributed non-free software in it's ports tree. He didn't
Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men
On Jan 4, 2008 9:14 AM, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 10:00:55PM +, Miod Vallat wrote: Rui Miguel Silva is continually making you guys remove [EMAIL PROTECTED] from the cc's of your messages. FYI, I continually remove people from the CC on mailing-list posts. Yet you have no idea whether these people are subscribed to these mailing lists. If they are not, why do their emails get into the mailing list? Some moderator enjoys letting flames come up? That's even more interesting... I consider it rude to receive duplicate email. Isn't it rude to prevent people from receiving answers they are seeking? Not everyone not subscribed to this list will end his/her messages with a ``please cc: me as I am not subscribed'' notice, because they expect people to do the right thing. Which is ``reply to all''. Their problem. Rui -- Frink! Today is Prickle-Prickle, the 4th day of Chaos in the YOLD 3174 + No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown + Whatever you do will be insignificant, | but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi + So let's do it...? This is a unmoderated list and unsubscribed people can mail to it.
Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men
On Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 02:15:08PM +0530, Siju George wrote: On Jan 4, 2008 1:03 AM, Theo de Raadt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Rui Miguel Silva is continually making you guys remove from the cc's of your messages. Who knows? Perhaps He gets Paid for it, and for this violent defense of insanity from all the misused funds of FSF Perhaps you're a paranoid dellusional individual? Otherwise why should he repeatedly say some thin that is not proprietary as proprietary even after being informed by tedu and others? Because for me it is proprietary when I can't run it in a commercial context. That is an OpenBSD site which has software, like for instance zangband, which is proprietary and is compiled and distributed from: ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/pub/OpenBSD/4.2/packages/i386/zangband-2.6.2p1-no_x11.tgz How many times do we have to tell you it's NOT proprietary, and It's not illegal/prohibbted to distribute Zangband. Yes it is, if you distribute it in a commercial context. Go the hell away you troll! You are the troll. Rui -- Hail Eris! Today is Prickle-Prickle, the 4th day of Chaos in the YOLD 3174 + No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown + Whatever you do will be insignificant, | but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi + So let's do it...?
Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men
On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 07:08:12PM -0700, L wrote: That is an insult! Why are you being so mean to Marco? Right, his extreme insults are meaningless and unprovocative. And why are you being so mean to me too? I read this list too! You are insulting me! Right, did the hat fit? Because I said some not all or even most. Anything can be taken as an insult. Specially insults. Did you know that people who speak the truth are insulting at times? People that do not put up with bull are very hard people at times? There's a difference between not putting up with bull and throwing bull along with insults. That seems to be Marco's favourite writing style. Did you know skillful liars are very nice people? Did you know cults drag people into their cults by being very nice and calm and positive? If you mean that only people who are cult-draggers are nice, calm and positive, then I hate the reality you live in. You've just insulted most of my friends, should they ever read you. Rui -- P'tang! Today is Prickle-Prickle, the 4th day of Chaos in the YOLD 3174 + No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown + Whatever you do will be insignificant, | but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi + So let's do it...?
Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men
On Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 09:56:03AM +0100, Karl Sjodahl - dunceor wrote: This is a unmoderated list and unsubscribed people can mail to it. If one doesn't want to hear what outsiders want to say, then perhaps posting should be restricted to list members. Rui -- This statement is false. Today is Prickle-Prickle, the 4th day of Chaos in the YOLD 3174 + No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown + Whatever you do will be insignificant, | but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi + So let's do it...?
Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men
On Jan 4, 2008 10:51 AM, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 09:56:03AM +0100, Karl Sjodahl - dunceor wrote: This is a unmoderated list and unsubscribed people can mail to it. If one doesn't want to hear what outsiders want to say, then perhaps posting should be restricted to list members. Rui -- This statement is false. Today is Prickle-Prickle, the 4th day of Chaos in the YOLD 3174 + No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown + Whatever you do will be insignificant, | but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi + So let's do it...? Who said anything about that? The discussion was about cc. You need to keep on subject and don't make up things.
Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men
On Jan 4, 2008 2:52 PM, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 02:15:08PM +0530, Siju George wrote: On Jan 4, 2008 1:03 AM, Theo de Raadt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Rui Miguel Silva is continually making you guys remove from the cc's of your messages. Who knows? Perhaps He gets Paid for it, and for this violent defense of insanity from all the misused funds of FSF Perhaps you're a paranoid dellusional individual? yes I am! I get a 5-10 minutes break to reality and sanity. Thats when I wrote it. And it is evident to every one who has been on this list before how you behave all the time. Otherwise why should he repeatedly say some thin that is not proprietary as proprietary even after being informed by tedu and others? Because for me it is proprietary when I can't run it in a commercial context. :-) I don't get you. It is commercial for you? you??? what does the license say? has anything in the license of that software been violated? Oh I understand now. You are just my opposite. You are sane most of the time but get Paranoid for a little time at random. That when you wrote this and felt others are paranoid. But if you want to impose your own judgment of licenses and your own interpretation of licences you better start a project of your own and show the rest of the world an example. That is an OpenBSD site which has software, like for instance zangband, which is proprietary and is compiled and distributed from: ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/pub/OpenBSD/4.2/packages/i386/zangband-2.6.2p1-no_x11.tgz How many times do we have to tell you it's NOT proprietary, and It's not illegal/prohibbted to distribute Zangband. Yes it is, if you distribute it in a commercial context. Go the hell away you troll! You are the troll. :-) that was to the guy who called you a troll right? I said perhaps you are a paid FSF mercenary or as you accused me delusional :-)
Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2008 3:21 PM To: misc@openbsd.org Subject: Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men Daniel Ouellet wrote: Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 12:33:26PM -0700, Theo de Raadt wrote: Rui Miguel Silva is continually making you guys remove [EMAIL PROTECTED] from the cc's of your messages. FYI, I continually remove people from the CC on mailing-list posts. I consider it rude to receive duplicate email. Except in his case, He is not subscribe to the list and if you don't cc him, he will simply not get it. It appears that even if you _do_ cc him, he doesn't get it...
Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men
On Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 05:44:59PM +0530, Siju George wrote: :-) that was to the guy who called you a troll right? I said perhaps you are a paid FSF mercenary or as you accused me delusional :-) I wish I was paid to only work on Free Software, I'd be much more productive. Rui -- Today is Prickle-Prickle, the 4th day of Chaos in the YOLD 3174 + No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown + Whatever you do will be insignificant, | but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi + So let's do it...?
Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men
2008/1/4, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 07:08:12PM -0700, L wrote: That is an insult! Why are you being so mean to Marco? Right, his extreme insults are meaningless and unprovocative. And why are you being so mean to me too? I read this list too! You are insulting me! Right, did the hat fit? Because I said some not all or even most. Anything can be taken as an insult. Specially insults. Did you know that people who speak the truth are insulting at times? People that do not put up with bull are very hard people at times? There's a difference between not putting up with bull and throwing bull along with insults. That seems to be Marco's favourite writing style. Did you know skillful liars are very nice people? Did you know cults drag people into their cults by being very nice and calm and positive? If you mean that only people who are cult-draggers are nice, calm and positive, then I hate the reality you live in. You've just insulted most of my friends, should they ever read you. Rui -- P'tang! Today is Prickle-Prickle, the 4th day of Chaos in the YOLD 3174 + No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown + Whatever you do will be insignificant, | but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi + So let's do it...? Oh, got to add the cc back btw... -- Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men
Rui, I kindly ask you to not remove Richards's e-mail, since he is as interested as everyone else who follows this thread. Richard does not receive duplicated e-mail, since he is not in misc@openbsd.org, so don't hesitate to add him. Greetings.
Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men
FYI, I continually remove people from the CC on mailing-list posts. Yet you have no idea whether these people are subscribed to these mailing lists. If they are not, why do their emails get into the mailing list? Because they sent it to it. Some moderator enjoys letting flames come up? That's even more interesting... This list is not moderated. Sometimes I wish it was. Isn't it rude to prevent people from receiving answers they are seeking? Not everyone not subscribed to this list will end his/her messages with a ``please cc: me as I am not subscribed'' notice, because they expect people to do the right thing. Which is ``reply to all''. Their problem. I could apply the same attitude to people who complain about getting the same message twice.
Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men
that's right, it's there! eh, Richard, my mom told me once that it is the best thing to tell truth, even when the truth is salty, as when you start to lie, you cannot stop and eventually you get all your lies exposed. Server: Apache/2.0.54 (Debian GNU/Linux) DAV/2 SVN/1.2.0 PHP/4.3.10-22 mod_ssl/2.0.54 OpenSSL/0.9.7e this sums it all up. jeez, that much for those principles of yours! gosh! to think of it... when i was in school, i read in a journal (a soviet one at that time) about great Richard Stallman, which fought the corporations by creating free software and the software was better than the commercial competition. i thought then wow, that's the man, he's so great!. now, that's a *disappointment* to see that the great man freeing the world in reality is behaving like irrelevant, lying politician. Theo's right, absolutely Richard, you are a lying hypocritical irrelevant man. You've completely lost your way, irrelevant, having many people that listen to you, you speak irresponsibly. and you're not sorry a bit. br, the judging reader On Jan 4, 2008 5:56 AM, Sunnz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hmmm Mr. Stallman is this your home page: stallman.org I was a bit curious about what would someone who reads web-sites by using a wget daemon through e-mails whose own web-site looks like... well... Apache httpd 2.0.54 ((Debian GNU/Linux) DAV/2 SVN/1.2.0 PHP/4.3.10-22 mod_ssl/2.0.54 OpenSSL/0.9.7e) And I thought you do not 'endorse' Debian nor Subversion? I am ready to hear what kind of exception rule you would to define next.
Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men
On Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 02:26:12PM -0800, Ted Unangst wrote: On Jan 4, 2008 1:22 AM, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Otherwise why should he repeatedly say some thin that is not proprietary as proprietary even after being informed by tedu and others? Because for me it is proprietary when I can't run it in a commercial context. you clearly don't know what proprietary means. if you don't understand the big words, stop using them. you also totally failed to comprehend the license. No, I understood it quite well. what i find even more hysterical is your claim that running a 5 year old rogue clone is needed to get your work done. What I find even more hysterical is your lack of english comprehension, for what I said is that restrictions against commercial usage make it proprietary, not that I need that piece of software. Rui -- Or not. Today is Prickle-Prickle, the 4th day of Chaos in the YOLD 3174 + No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown + Whatever you do will be insignificant, | but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi + So let's do it...?
Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men
On Jan 4, 2008 1:22 AM, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Otherwise why should he repeatedly say some thin that is not proprietary as proprietary even after being informed by tedu and others? Because for me it is proprietary when I can't run it in a commercial context. you clearly don't know what proprietary means. if you don't understand the big words, stop using them. you also totally failed to comprehend the license. what i find even more hysterical is your claim that running a 5 year old rogue clone is needed to get your work done.
Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men
On Jan 4, 2008 2:31 PM, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What I find even more hysterical is your lack of english comprehension, for what I said is that restrictions against commercial usage make it proprietary, not that I need that piece of software. you still don't get to make up new definitions for proprietary.
Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men
On Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 02:49:45PM -0800, Ted Unangst wrote: On Jan 4, 2008 2:31 PM, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What I find even more hysterical is your lack of english comprehension, for what I said is that restrictions against commercial usage make it proprietary, not that I need that piece of software. you still don't get to make up new definitions for proprietary. Neither do you, so you could spare everyone by not keeping this thread going. Rui -- Umlaut Zebra |ber alles! Today is Prickle-Prickle, the 4th day of Chaos in the YOLD 3174 + No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown + Whatever you do will be insignificant, | but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi + So let's do it...?
Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men
Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: know what proprietary means. if you don't understand the big words, stop using them. you also totally failed to comprehend the license. No, I understood it quite well. Yes, no I did not understood it nor not quite never well. what i find even more hysterical is your claim that running a 5 year old rogue clone is needed to get your work done. What I find even more hysterical is your lack of english comprehension, for what I said is that restrictions against commercial usage make it proprietary, not that I need that piece of software. Rui Last time I tried to download VirtualBox emulator (GPL'd), they would not let a company download the binary compiled versions of VirtualBox for commercial use... i.e. they were restricting my commercial use of the software only to source code copies, which is obnoxious and restrictive. To me and 99 percent of other companies, only the binaries are the things we care about for the working emulator package. Having the source code is an additional nice extra to have, but not essential. Personal users are of course allowed to download the VirtualBox binaries - but companies are forced to download the obnoxious sources only. GPL software can therefore be proprietary software (since your definition of proprietary software is restricting the commercial users). Several GNU softwares out there restrict the binaries from companies or restrict other factors.. such as documentation and consulting (which could be recorded on audio tapes and copied millions of times instead).
Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men
Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: Neither do you that's insulting.
Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men
Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: On Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 02:49:45PM -0800, Ted Unangst wrote: On Jan 4, 2008 2:31 PM, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What I find even more hysterical is your lack of english comprehension, for what I said is that restrictions against commercial usage make it proprietary, not that I need that piece of software. you still don't get to make up new definitions for proprietary. Neither do you, so you could spare everyone by not keeping this thread going. Rui This thread was started by Stallman, not the OpenBSD folks. That said I think it is important for OpenBSD developers to tell us users what a complete and unsolicited fucknut you are so that we, the users, don't get the impression you have any kind of authority. Anyway it has now been communicated what a blatant fucksteak you are so now that everyone knows, feel free to stop posting to the thread. Regards Johan M:son Lindman
Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men
I was a bit curious about what would someone who reads web-sites by using a wget daemon through e-mails whose own web-site looks like... well... Apache httpd 2.0.54 ((Debian GNU/Linux) DAV/2 SVN/1.2.0 PHP/4.3.10-22 mod_ssl/2.0.54 OpenSSL/0.9.7e) I use wget for personal reasons. I have nothing against running a web site. I don't endorse Debian, but I don't object to getting free software from Debian (or from OpenBSD) and installing it. As for Subversion, I don't know why it is mentioned there, but I have nothing against using Subversion. It is free software. This continues the pattern of straw men. Over and over, people on this list criticize me for doing something which neither I nor anyone else here actually thinks is wrong.
Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men
keeps objecting that he doesn't object.
Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men
On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 12:05:37PM -0500, Stuart VanZee wrote: Wow... it is incredibly telling that you chose a game, a pretty obscure one at that as far as I can tell, to base your argument on. The world will fall because OpenBSD recommends that people install a game... a game that is free to copy and use for non- commercial use (I looked it up), and you had to go through almost the ENTIRE package collection all the way to the Zs before you could find such a pitiful example. Because they are such pitiful cases, they could be easily removed and remove Stallman's objections to list OpenBSD at the recommended Free Software operating systems, right? More promotion of OpenBSD would be good, right? Stopping this childish-tantrum regarding the FSF would also be very much more productive. This discussion all started because Mr. Stallman very publicly stated that OpenBSD was non-free and distributed non-free software in it's ports tree. He didn't say OpenBSD was non-free, but that it distributed non-free Software. Looking at ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/pub/OpenBSD/4.2/packages/i386/zangband-2.6.2p1.tgz ... seems to me pretty a pretty clear case. I am pretty sure he had no knowledge of zangband and it's non-free license. He was talking about non-free software in the ports tree. BTW, I think he was (as I frequently happen to by abuse of language) referring to the packages site, e.g.: http://www.openbsd.org/4.2_packages/i386.html Best, Rui -- Grudnuk demand sustenance! Today is Pungenday, the 3rd day of Chaos in the YOLD 3174 + No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown + Whatever you do will be insignificant, | but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi + So let's do it...?
Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men
nostromo:tobiasu$ for x in blahblah STFU. KTHXBYE; do banner $x; done # # # # #### # # #### ### ## # ## ## ## # ## # # # ## ## # # ## ## ### # ## ## ## # ## ## # ## # ## ## ## # ## ## # # ## ## ## # ## ## ## # ### ### # # # ### # # # ## # # # ## # # ### # # ### # ### # # ### # ###### ## ### # # # # ## # # ### # # ## # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # ########## ## # # ## # # # # ### # # ## # # # # ### ## ## # # # ## ####
Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men
On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 01:23:21PM -0500, William Boshuck wrote: Richard Stallman referred to certain URLs in certain Makefiles in the ports tree---not the collection of packages, after (in the interview which indirectly prompted this thread) confusing OpenBSD's ports tree with its installation system. He did not refer to the packages collection in the statement in question. I seem to have read somewhere he asked for an adenda clarifying the situation, was it referred to these? I seem to have understood it to be the packages distribution. This discussion all started because Mr. Stallman very publicly stated that OpenBSD was non-free and distributed non-free software in it's ports tree. He didn't say OpenBSD was non-free, but that it distributed non-free Software. He said that it include[s] in [its] installation system ... non-free software. I'm willing to bet he got bad information or missed the ports/packages components. People ain't computers. Rui -- Wibble. Today is Pungenday, the 3rd day of Chaos in the YOLD 3174 + No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown + Whatever you do will be insignificant, | but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi + So let's do it...?
Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men
On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 05:48:13PM +, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 12:05:37PM -0500, Stuart VanZee wrote: Wow... it is incredibly telling that you chose a game, a pretty obscure one at that as far as I can tell, to base your argument on. The world will fall because OpenBSD recommends that people install a game... a game that is free to copy and use for non- commercial use (I looked it up), and you had to go through almost the ENTIRE package collection all the way to the Zs before you could find such a pitiful example. Because they are such pitiful cases, they could be easily removed and remove Stallman's objections to list OpenBSD at the recommended Free Software operating systems, right? More promotion of OpenBSD would be good, right? Richard Stallman referred to certain URLs in certain Makefiles in the ports tree---not the collection of packages, after (in the interview which indirectly prompted this thread) confusing OpenBSD's ports tree with its installation system. He did not refer to the packages collection in the statement in question. This discussion all started because Mr. Stallman very publicly stated that OpenBSD was non-free and distributed non-free software in it's ports tree. He didn't say OpenBSD was non-free, but that it distributed non-free Software. He said that it include[s] in [its] installation system ... non-free software.
Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men
On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 06:30:44PM +, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 01:23:21PM -0500, William Boshuck wrote: Richard Stallman referred to certain URLs in certain Makefiles in the ports tree---not the collection of packages, after (in the interview which indirectly prompted this thread) confusing OpenBSD's ports tree with its installation system. He did not refer to the packages collection in the statement in question. I seem to have read somewhere he asked for an adenda clarifying the situation, was it referred to these? I seem to have understood it to be the packages distribution. He should have researched this himself instead of spouting horseshit. This discussion all started because Mr. Stallman very publicly stated that OpenBSD was non-free and distributed non-free software in it's ports tree. He didn't say OpenBSD was non-free, but that it distributed non-free Software. He said that it include[s] in [its] installation system ... non-free software. I'm willing to bet he got bad information or missed the ports/packages components. People ain't computers. Time to grow up and take responsibility for one's actions. Assuming he actually got bad information don't you think he should have spent 3 minutes of his time to figure reality out? Why are you giving him a free out of jail card? He does this over and over again; is it truly just a mistake? I think not. Rui -- Wibble. Today is Pungenday, the 3rd day of Chaos in the YOLD 3174 + No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown + Whatever you do will be insignificant, | but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi + So let's do it...?
Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men
On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 05:48:13PM +, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 12:05:37PM -0500, Stuart VanZee wrote: Wow... it is incredibly telling that you chose a game, a pretty obscure one at that as far as I can tell, to base your argument on. The world will fall because OpenBSD recommends that people install a game... a game that is free to copy and use for non- commercial use (I looked it up), and you had to go through almost the ENTIRE package collection all the way to the Zs before you could find such a pitiful example. Because they are such pitiful cases, they could be easily removed and remove Stallman's objections to list OpenBSD at the recommended Free Software operating systems, right? More promotion of OpenBSD would be good, right? His recommendation is as empty as his ideals. They are Free from any rational thought. More promotion for OpenBSD is only good if it benefits the project. Having a bunch of morons show up is not a goal. We aren't after conquering the world unlike some other projects. Stopping this childish-tantrum regarding the FSF would also be very much more productive. It would be nice if people would stop defending non defensible hypocritical positions. His arguments are a misleading hyperbole. This discussion all started because Mr. Stallman very publicly stated that OpenBSD was non-free and distributed non-free software in it's ports tree. He didn't say OpenBSD was non-free, but that it distributed non-free Software. Which is inaccurate. Looking at ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/pub/OpenBSD/4.2/packages/i386/zangband-2.6.2p1.tgz ... seems to me pretty a pretty clear case. I am pretty sure he had no knowledge of zangband and it's non-free license. He was talking about non-free software in the ports tree. BTW, I think he was (as I frequently happen to by abuse of language) referring to the packages site, e.g.: http://www.openbsd.org/4.2_packages/i386.html Best, Rui -- Grudnuk demand sustenance! Today is Pungenday, the 3rd day of Chaos in the YOLD 3174 + No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown + Whatever you do will be insignificant, | but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi + So let's do it...?
Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men
From: Rui Miguel Silva Seabra Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2008 12:48 PM To: Openbsd Misc (E-mail) Subject: Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 12:05:37PM -0500, Stuart VanZee wrote: Wow... it is incredibly telling that you chose a game, a pretty obscure one at that as far as I can tell, to base your argument on. The world will fall because OpenBSD recommends that people install a game... a game that is free to copy and use for non- commercial use (I looked it up), and you had to go through almost the ENTIRE package collection all the way to the Zs before you could find such a pitiful example. Because they are such pitiful cases, they could be easily removed and remove Stallman's objections to list OpenBSD at the recommended Free Software operating systems, right? More promotion of OpenBSD would be good, right? CASE... not cases, you have come up with one CASE. One example, IF I chose to believe in your modification of the original statement that sparked this thread (which I don't) and believe that Mr. Stallman was speaking of non-free software in packages your side of the argument gets smaller and smaller. See what happens when you have to prove your argument? It all boils down to you having an issue with ONE package. A game at that. Not production software, or a web browser, or an email package, a game. A single game that, from the tone of your argument must be destroying all that free software stands for. Guess what... I read the license text for that game and it sounds exactly like what your precious GPL would say if it was boiled down to it's most basic components. You can have the source code... You can modify the source code... You just can't use the source code for your commercial application. Sound familiar? That is almost exactly what I was told by a GPL Zealot that the GPL lic was all about when I was first introduced to Linux so many years ago. So your example of why OpenBSD isn't free is a farce. It wouldn't bother me if the OpenBSD devs decided to axe that package. If I wanted to use it I could install it from ports just fine, I usually do anyway, but the argument that they should do so to fit yours or Mr Stallman's ideals of what free software is about are wrong on so many levels. It comes down to trying to force others to live by your ideals. It's just like the christian croud thinking that it's ok to discriminate against the pagans because it would take such a small thing for them (us) to convert to christianity. Never mind that many of us pagans view christianity as a violent death cult, so why would we ever want to. You say that it would be such a small thing for the OpenBSD project to do to live up to your ideals when it comes to free software but quite frankly, I think that many of the OpenBSD crowd think that your ideals are wrong. Freedom is all about freedom of choice, If that means people choose non-free software on OpenBSD at least they are using OpenBSD which is in itself free software. OpenBSD with ALL the non-free software from ports (yes, really ports) would still be a much more free system than any Windows system using as much free apps as a person could find for it. Stopping this childish-tantrum regarding the FSF would also be very much more productive. childish-tantrum? You know, when you resort to attacking the character of the other persons argument rather than argue the facts of your case it means you have pretty much lost the debate and have nothing more to say. This discussion all started because Mr. Stallman very publicly stated that OpenBSD was non-free and distributed non-free software in it's ports tree. He didn't say OpenBSD was non-free, but that it distributed non-free Software. Looking at ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/pub/OpenBSD/4.2/packages/i386/zangband-2 ... seems to me pretty a pretty clear case. Ok... I get it... You are saying that zangband is such an important piece of software that it alone is the cause of the downfall of free software. Because OpenBSD distributes zangband nobody has any reason to install a free OS or switch from MS Office to free office production software. No... wait... I don't get it. zangband is a GAME. It could fall off the face of the earth and nobody would blink. The few people who play it would move on to the next game. I can't believe that this thread has gone on this long and this one GAME is what it is all about. Oh wait it really isn't, but when we boil the argument down, it does become the final stand for a free software zealot who didn't realize that he didn't have a real position in the first case s
Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men
Watch your blood pressure there Stuart. -Original Message- From: Stuart VanZee[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 3-1-08 20:23:52 To: Openbsd Misc (E-mail)misc@openbsd.org Subject: Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men From: Rui Miguel Silva Seabra Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2008 12:48 PM To: Openbsd Misc (E-mail) Subject: Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 12:05:37PM -0500, Stuart VanZee wrote: Wow... it is incredibly telling that you chose a game, a pretty obscure one at that as far as I can tell, to base your argument on. The world will fall because OpenBSD recommends that people install a game... a game that is free to copy and use for non- commercial use (I looked it up), and you had to go through almost the ENTIRE package collection all the way to the Zs before you could find such a pitiful example. Because they are such pitiful cases, they could be easily removed and remove Stallman's objections to list OpenBSD at the recommended Free Software operating systems, right? More promotion of OpenBSD would be good, right? CASE... not cases, you have come up with one CASE. One example, IF I chose to believe in your modification of the original statement that sparked this thread (which I don't) and believe that Mr. Stallman was speaking of non-free software in packages your side of the argument gets smaller and smaller. See what happens when you have to prove your argument? It all boils down to you having an issue with ONE package. A game at that. Not production software, or a web browser, or an email package, a game. A single game that, from the tone of your argument must be destroying all that free software stands for. Guess what... I read the license text for that game and it sounds exactly like what your precious GPL would say if it was boiled down to it's most basic components. You can have the source code... You can modify the source code... You just can't use the source code for your commercial application. Sound familiar? That is almost exactly what I was told by a GPL Zealot that the GPL lic was all about when I was first introduced to Linux so many years ago. So your example of why OpenBSD isn't free is a farce. It wouldn't bother me if the OpenBSD devs decided to axe that package. If I wanted to use it I could install it from ports just fine, I usually do anyway, but the argument that they should do so to fit yours or Mr Stallman's ideals of what free software is about are wrong on so many levels. It comes down to trying to force others to live by your ideals. It's just like the christian croud thinking that it's ok to discriminate against the pagans because it would take such a small thing for them (us) to convert to christianity. Never mind that many of us pagans view christianity as a violent death cult, so why would we ever want to. You say that it would be such a small thing for the OpenBSD project to do to live up to your ideals when it comes to free software but quite frankly, I think that many of the OpenBSD crowd think that your ideals are wrong. Freedom is all about freedom of choice, If that means people choose non-free software on OpenBSD at least they are using OpenBSD which is in itself free software. OpenBSD with ALL the non-free software from ports (yes, really ports) would still be a much more free system than any Windows system using as much free apps as a person could find for it. Stopping this childish-tantrum regarding the FSF would also be very much more productive. childish-tantrum? You know, when you resort to attacking the character of the other persons argument rather than argue the facts of your case it means you have pretty much lost the debate and have nothing more to say. This discussion all started because Mr. Stallman very publicly stated that OpenBSD was non-free and distributed non-free software in it's ports tree. He didn't say OpenBSD was non-free, but that it distributed non-free Software. Looking at ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/pub/OpenBSD/4.2/packages/i386/zangband-2 ... seems to me pretty a pretty clear case. Ok... I get it... You are saying that zangband is such an important piece of software that it alone is the cause of the downfall of free software. Because OpenBSD distributes zangband nobody has any reason to install a free OS or switch from MS Office to free office production software. No... wait... I don't get it. zangband is a GAME. It could fall off the face of the earth and nobody would blink. The few people who play it would move on to the next game. I can't believe that this thread has gone on this long and this one GAME is what it is all about. Oh wait it really isn't, but when we boil the argument down, it does become the final stand for a free software zealot who didn't realize that he didn't have a real position in the first case s
Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men
Rui Miguel Silva is continually making you guys remove [EMAIL PROTECTED] from the cc's of your messages. If you are going to flame rms, it is best to keep him cc'd. From: Rui Miguel Silva Seabra Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2008 12:48 PM To: Openbsd Misc (E-mail) Subject: Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 12:05:37PM -0500, Stuart VanZee wrote: Wow... it is incredibly telling that you chose a game, a pretty obscure one at that as far as I can tell, to base your argument on. The world will fall because OpenBSD recommends that people install a game... a game that is free to copy and use for non- commercial use (I looked it up), and you had to go through almost the ENTIRE package collection all the way to the Zs before you could find such a pitiful example. Because they are such pitiful cases, they could be easily removed and remove Stallman's objections to list OpenBSD at the recommended Free Software operating systems, right? More promotion of OpenBSD would be good, right? CASE... not cases, you have come up with one CASE. One example, IF I chose to believe in your modification of the original statement that sparked this thread (which I don't) and believe that Mr. Stallman was speaking of non-free software in packages your side of the argument gets smaller and smaller. See what happens when you have to prove your argument? It all boils down to you having an issue with ONE package. A game at that. Not production software, or a web browser, or an email package, a game. A single game that, from the tone of your argument must be destroying all that free software stands for. Guess what... I read the license text for that game and it sounds exactly like what your precious GPL would say if it was boiled down to it's most basic components. You can have the source code... You can modify the source code... You just can't use the source code for your commercial application. Sound familiar? That is almost exactly what I was told by a GPL Zealot that the GPL lic was all about when I was first introduced to Linux so many years ago. So your example of why OpenBSD isn't free is a farce. It wouldn't bother me if the OpenBSD devs decided to axe that package. If I wanted to use it I could install it from ports just fine, I usually do anyway, but the argument that they should do so to fit yours or Mr Stallman's ideals of what free software is about are wrong on so many levels. It comes down to trying to force others to live by your ideals. It's just like the christian croud thinking that it's ok to discriminate against the pagans because it would take such a small thing for them (us) to convert to christianity. Never mind that many of us pagans view christianity as a violent death cult, so why would we ever want to. You say that it would be such a small thing for the OpenBSD project to do to live up to your ideals when it comes to free software but quite frankly, I think that many of the OpenBSD crowd think that your ideals are wrong. Freedom is all about freedom of choice, If that means people choose non-free software on OpenBSD at least they are using OpenBSD which is in itself free software. OpenBSD with ALL the non-free software from ports (yes, really ports) would still be a much more free system than any Windows system using as much free apps as a person could find for it. Stopping this childish-tantrum regarding the FSF would also be very much more productive. childish-tantrum? You know, when you resort to attacking the character of the other persons argument rather than argue the facts of your case it means you have pretty much lost the debate and have nothing more to say. This discussion all started because Mr. Stallman very publicly stated that OpenBSD was non-free and distributed non-free software in it's ports tree. He didn't say OpenBSD was non-free, but that it distributed non-free Software. Looking at ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/pub/OpenBSD/4.2/packages/i386/zangband-2 ... seems to me pretty a pretty clear case. Ok... I get it... You are saying that zangband is such an important piece of software that it alone is the cause of the downfall of free software. Because OpenBSD distributes zangband nobody has any reason to install a free OS or switch from MS Office to free office production software. No... wait... I don't get it. zangband is a GAME. It could fall off the face of the earth and nobody would blink. The few people who play it would move on to the next game. I can't believe that this thread has gone on this long and this one GAME is what it is all about. Oh wait it really isn't, but when we boil the argument down, it does become the final stand for a free software zealot who didn't realize that he didn't have a real position in the first case s
Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men
On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 12:33:26PM -0700, Theo de Raadt wrote: Rui Miguel Silva is continually making you guys remove [EMAIL PROTECTED] from the cc's of your messages. FYI, I continually remove people from the CC on mailing-list posts. I consider it rude to receive duplicate email. If you are going to flame rms, it is best to keep him cc'd. That's the spirit, no doubpt about that. No solving differences, flame away. *sheesh* Rui -- Today is Pungenday, the 3rd day of Chaos in the YOLD 3174 + No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown + Whatever you do will be insignificant, | but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi + So let's do it...?
Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men
On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 12:34:24PM -0600, Marco Peereboom wrote: It would be nice if people would stop defending non defensible hypocritical positions. His arguments are a misleading hyperbole. Your attitude is also indefensible and ostentiously hypocritical, with a rudeness that only adds value to every single word you write. Many times you falsely misrepresented what people say, either by lack of english understanding or by intention. None of them bore well on your character. Rui -- Kallisti! Today is Pungenday, the 3rd day of Chaos in the YOLD 3174 + No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown + Whatever you do will be insignificant, | but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi + So let's do it...?
Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men
Re-adding RMS. On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 12:34:24PM -0600, Marco Peereboom wrote: On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 05:48:13PM +, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 12:05:37PM -0500, Stuart VanZee wrote: Wow... it is incredibly telling that you chose a game, a pretty obscure one at that as far as I can tell, to base your argument on. The world will fall because OpenBSD recommends that people install a game... a game that is free to copy and use for non- commercial use (I looked it up), and you had to go through almost the ENTIRE package collection all the way to the Zs before you could find such a pitiful example. Because they are such pitiful cases, they could be easily removed and remove Stallman's objections to list OpenBSD at the recommended Free Software operating systems, right? More promotion of OpenBSD would be good, right? His recommendation is as empty as his ideals. They are Free from any rational thought. More promotion for OpenBSD is only good if it benefits the project. Having a bunch of morons show up is not a goal. We aren't after conquering the world unlike some other projects. Stopping this childish-tantrum regarding the FSF would also be very much more productive. It would be nice if people would stop defending non defensible hypocritical positions. His arguments are a misleading hyperbole. This discussion all started because Mr. Stallman very publicly stated that OpenBSD was non-free and distributed non-free software in it's ports tree. He didn't say OpenBSD was non-free, but that it distributed non-free Software. Which is inaccurate. Looking at ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/pub/OpenBSD/4.2/packages/i386/zangband-2.6.2p1.tgz ... seems to me pretty a pretty clear case. I am pretty sure he had no knowledge of zangband and it's non-free license. He was talking about non-free software in the ports tree. BTW, I think he was (as I frequently happen to by abuse of language) referring to the packages site, e.g.: http://www.openbsd.org/4.2_packages/i386.html Best, Rui -- Grudnuk demand sustenance! Today is Pungenday, the 3rd day of Chaos in the YOLD 3174 + No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown + Whatever you do will be insignificant, | but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi + So let's do it...?
Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men
Rui Miguel Silva is continually making you guys remove [EMAIL PROTECTED] from the cc's of your messages. FYI, I continually remove people from the CC on mailing-list posts. Yet you have no idea whether these people are subscribed to these mailing lists. I consider it rude to receive duplicate email. Isn't it rude to prevent people from receiving answers they are seeking? Not everyone not subscribed to this list will end his/her messages with a ``please cc: me as I am not subscribed'' notice, because they expect people to do the right thing. Which is ``reply to all''. If duplicate answers bother you, train your mail user agent to merge them.
Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men
Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 12:34:24PM -0600, Marco Peereboom wrote: It would be nice if people would stop defending non defensible hypocritical positions. His arguments are a misleading hyperbole. Your attitude is also indefensible and ostentiously hypocritical, with a rudeness that only adds value to every single word you write. Many times you falsely misrepresented what people say, either by lack of english understanding or by intention. None of them bore well on your character. Rui That is an insult! Why are you being so mean to Marco? And why are you being so mean to me too? I read this list too! You are insulting me! See how the whole insulting part about it has NOTHING to do with the conversation? Anything can be taken as an insult. Stick to discussing the matters at hand, instead of continually trying to divert the conversation to a topic of 'who is insulting'. Did you know that people who speak the truth are insulting at times? People that do not put up with bull are very hard people at times? Do you think cops and police are nice people all the time when they are dealing with liars? SHould they just be nice to all the criminals who lie? Not saying GNU people are criminals, just giving an example of when NOT to be nice. Did you know skillful liars are very nice people? Did you know cults drag people into their cults by being very nice and calm and positive? Did you know that overly positive people are actually dangerous people? What scares me is the amount of positivity of the whole FSF even when they are in deep trouble. It's like they have no fear of being wrong.. because being wrong is part of the game. L505
Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men
Hmmm Mr. Stallman is this your home page: stallman.org I was a bit curious about what would someone who reads web-sites by using a wget daemon through e-mails whose own web-site looks like... well... Apache httpd 2.0.54 ((Debian GNU/Linux) DAV/2 SVN/1.2.0 PHP/4.3.10-22 mod_ssl/2.0.54 OpenSSL/0.9.7e) And I thought you do not 'endorse' Debian nor Subversion? I am ready to hear what kind of exception rule you would to define next.
