> > In addition, I thought that OpenSolaris was just a kernel, but it > > looks like the question had in mind a whole system. This > > miscommunication has the effect of making my statement appear to be an > > endorsement of a system. > > Huh? OpenSolaris is just a kernel > > That's what I thought. It _is_ free software, what there is of it. > But it isn't a usable solution. That's what I meant at the time.
You spend a lot of time thinking the wrong thing, don't you. > Someone like you is not allowed to spread mistruths like this in the > media. > > "Spread mistruths" is a distorted way to describe a couple of > misunderstandings. And as far as I know there is no way to forbid > anyone to do that. If I knew a way, I would do it. Oh, forgive me. Instead, you don't think wrong. You think misunderstandings, repeatedly, over and over, repetitively. Forgive me for mis-diagnosing the symptoms. > Since you did it three times so rapidly, I am calling you a liar. > > Mistakes are not lies. And these mistakes were misunderstandings > anyway. Three misunderstandings, protested each time instead of apologizing is a lie. Ask anyone in law enforcement. Richard, you are a liar. > And > since you refuse to undo your commercial support in Emacs and GCC, I > am going to call you a hypocrite. > > I'm following the same principles that I apply to others. > I've explained both these principles and my actions; the readers > can judge all aspects for themselves. Oh boy, another lie. Emacs, gcc, OpenDarwin, and ReactOS. I understand the general rule -- but Richard is except. Lying Hypocrite.
