Finally! An argument that doesn't just involve restating claims as their own
proof. A shame it's an argument-by-analogy that breaks down at the first
examination. Firstly, there's the little matter of communists and
nationalists not forking out of a common parent movement.
More troubling for your analogy though, the Constitution for Europe is not
the primary output of the communist and nationalist movements. In the case of
the software freedom movement, free code is the primary output, regardless of
whether the workers creating that output use the language of "free software",
"open source", "FOSS", "FLOSS, "libre" or whatever. Communists and
nationalist both speaking out against the Constitution of Europe is more akin
to the software freedom movement and Microfost both speaking out against
"internet fast lanes". By doing so, both are becoming part of a "unified
front" against net neutrality, but that doesn't make Microsoft part of the
software freedom movement. "Free software" and "open source" are the
opposite, a divided front, working together on the same output. Your analogy
fails to even illustrate your case (and being an analogy, can't prove it).
Good try though :)
>> I am not sure why you put this link. In my opinion, it demonstrates that
there are two different movements, not one like you argue.
So, if I showed you a comment thread of a debate between two communist
groups, for example, would you then conclude that there are two distinct
communist movements? If so, then there is distinct communist movement for
every 3 communists that form a splinter group. Are there also thousands of
distinct anti-TPPA movements? Clearly this is nonsense. Discursive
differences and faction fighting inside a movement does not prove that it's
more than one movement, quite the opposite. It proves it's a movement, not a
religion.
>> The comments in particular show that Haiku developers do not care about
the freedoms of their users.
