Who am I Theo asked, a big fat nobody (maybe), but I started this issue to begin with and after criticizing Theo for being unnecessary rude to Richard I have noticed that Richard keeps avoiding the facts!
Richard you continue to avoid the questions or issues brought forth by Theo, could you please focus on the issue rather than commenting the same statements over and over again! Theo wrote: > On the bsd talk show you did not withhold your recommendation because > the ports system suggests non-free programs. No way, that's not what > you said on that show. > > What actually happened is that you withheld your recommendation > because it CONTAINS non-free programs; that is what your words were. This is the TRUTH, anybody can hear that for himself, and that's why I wrote to the list in the first place! > It turns out that the above assessment was based on a complete lack of > research. It was uneducated, and you should have apologized for the > error. > > You were really clear in your interview. And wrong. > > Later on, on this mailing list, you have changed your statements to > say that your recommend against OpenBSD because it now... RECOMMENDS > non-free software. Clearly the TRUTH as well! We have all witnessed that! > We've made it quite clear that Emacs and gcc recommend the use of > non-free software, by directly containing code to support those > systems. The ports tree does not contain code to support non-free > components. It simply provides URLs to a few select things which > people might wish to use. Itself, it contains no non-free code and > makes no recommendations. But gcc and emacs directly contain code > which RECOMMENDS compilation on non-free systems, by actually > compiling and running there. This is the TRUTH! By containing code which recommends compilation on non-free system then Richard you are doing MORE to support non-free than the OpenBSD ports system is! That's a fact! That's NOT an opinion. > You are a hypocritical liar, Richard. > > Your lies taint the efforts of the entire FSF and GNU communities. > > Shame on you all for letting Richard mislead you so. I am sorry Theo, I know you don't give a rats ass, but you are right, and you have been right all along! Dear Richard unless you actually address the above mentioned issues, in context of the e-mail from Theo, you will look hypocritical! You say what you don't do yourself. Best regards. Rico Secada.
