On Mon, Jan 07, 2008 at 12:15:37PM -0500, Richard Stallman wrote: > I wrote: > > >> I hope that you have not arranged in effect to cause our web site > >> to be attacked. > > You responded: > > It was a recommendation of OpenBSD rather than an attack. > > It was neither a recommendation of OpenBSD nor an attack. > > Your message did not talk about OpenBSD, but if it had, that would not > be an excuse. If you post information about an exploit through which > someone's site can be attacked, you can't evade the responsibility by > including some opinions in the message. > > I would not call your message "an attack", because encouraging attacks > is not the same thing as making an attack. It is not the same, but it > goes in the same direction. I hope that the other OpenBSD developers > will repudiate such conduct. Surely we can disagree without resorting > to encouraging sabotage. >
Richard, you've said some stupid things, mangled peoples' words and totally confused the issue on some things, but this takes the cake. he's talking about the "attack" itself, not the post. further, the "attack" is not an attack at all. your whole post is just yammering about a non-issue, trying to make your detractor look like a bad person. this is a very clear example of how you operate. you pass unfavorable judgement on people you do not like about things you very clearly do not understand, much less have researched yourself. would you please go away now. please? -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] SDF Public Access UNIX System - http://sdf.lonestar.org
