Marco Peereboom wrote: >> >> I am not changing the meaning of words, for the most part I am taking >> your words, with your meanings, and applying them consistently >> to your system, until it produces a contradiction. >> If your words, your definitions and your values were consistent >> no contradiction would occur. >> >> One of the most serious problems that you have is that if you have a >> system that is self >> contraditictory and you accept the contradictions as truth, then you can >> prove anything. >> that is a principle of logic. It has nothing to do with me, except that >> I have used it as a tool. >> >> If there is no contraditiction in your system of values, then it will >> not work. >> > > If you feel this is the case then there is something wrong with your > reading comprehension. You contort my words every time but they don't > mean what you say. It was kind of funny earlier but now its getting > boring. > It is basic logic 101. I am actually being much kinder to your words than has OpenBSD has been with Richards. I have not chosen the words, but the meanings I ascribe to them are their ordinary accepted meanings. I did not choose the values. > I don't hate RMS or GNU or GPL etc. I find them silly at best but that > is besides the point. Point is that someone comes and pisses in my > sandbox. I piss and poop back. Especially if that someone shows up > playing moral high ground while being a complete and total hypocrite. > Is there some scatalogical affliction here? Is it possible to discuss anything on the OpenBSD list without piss, poop, and insults?
I have been on the OpenBSD list for some time. Every time the Linux Kernel crowd pisses on OpenBSD, OpenBSD hunts RMS down and demands that he compell the LKML'ers to follow OpenBSD edicts. OpenBSD invited RMS into its tent. Further, he did not piss in your sandbox, OpenBSD took insult where there was none, and then got more upset when he bothered to say so. If you think you have the moral high ground then argue that. There are several very easy ways for OpenBSD to "take the moral high ground" It is easy "our values and principles do not permit us to meet the criteria RMS uses for his recommendation". The problems with that are: you have to accept that your commitment to your particular definition of freedom is a higher value than your opposition to non-free software. It also means RMS's remarks are true.
