Rjack stated in post mdednbh7m6qg8ylxnz2dnuvz_vcdn...@giganews.com on 9/27/09 6:52 AM:
> Snit wrote: >> Rick stated in post kkadnbabnz7z-clxnz2dnuvz_redn...@supernews.com >> on 9/27/09 6:15 AM: >> >>>> The idiotic attempt by Richard Stallman to re-define the >>>> meaning of the word "free" is an abject failure. >>> Stallman has not tried to re-difine free. Get a dictionary. >> >> The dictionary does not talk about his "freedom 3". Something for >> you to chew on, eh? >> >> > > Since the dictionary does not define "freedom 3", then it must be > something Stallman imagined. Correct? > > Sincerely, > Rjack :) The Free Software Foundation claims they "maintain" their own definition: <http://www.fsf.org/licensing/essays/free-sw.html> ----- We maintain this free software definition... ----- Do not get me wrong... when speaking about a specific idea which is important to you, as they are, it makes sense to be precise with how *you* are using the key words. The fact they do this makes sense... but it is not a standard dictionary definition, it is far more details and precise. -- [INSERT .SIG HERE] _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
