From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Jambunathan K Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Please don't refer to Emacs as "open source" Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2011 11:17:22 +0530 Message-ID: <81mxhi1g5x.fsf@gmail.com> References: <010001cc29eb$fc806cb0$f5814610$@cs.ua.edu> <87zkljcxg4.fsf@gmail.com> <877h8niao3.fsf@gmail.com> <8739jbxpjh.fsf@gmail.com> <87mxhjp5od.fsf@gmail.com> <87d3ifuqi6.fsf@gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1308204417 29396 80.91.229.12 (16 Jun 2011 06:06:57 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2011 06:06:57 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Antoine Levitt , rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Miles Bader Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Jun 16 08:06:51 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QX5j8-0003Yi-1I for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 16 Jun 2011 08:06:50 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:34050 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QX5j7-0001kT-83 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 16 Jun 2011 02:06:49 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:43353) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QX5in-0001ju-4A for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 16 Jun 2011 02:06:30 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QX5il-0006JC-IA for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 16 Jun 2011 02:06:28 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-pv0-f169.google.com ([74.125.83.169]:35488) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QX5ik-0006Iy-Ub; Thu, 16 Jun 2011 02:06:27 -0400 Original-Received: by pvc12 with SMTP id 12so1096269pvc.0 for ; Wed, 15 Jun 2011 23:06:25 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:from:to:cc:subject:references:mail-followup-to :date:in-reply-to:message-id:user-agent:mime-version:content-type; bh=x04+szxYBjDLGIAyBYw3jpLqBjdx7eqFYGXJi9MTA2s=; b=f391m4SMs0LNYjIR3DCO9UZNUkq4HYjkfsi+Y9R11zd706JvP6PKe0jhdcZxXXcnbB XEH36tx15pyaMFhXNH23JuISIvvJu8+kX98NJjPLo6RcjX9KAT7H9zHhi4cKM2+KDIg/ L/KJSUDXj4O8pc2pN5twytRV+q8yZyViz56Bk= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=from:to:cc:subject:references:mail-followup-to:date:in-reply-to :message-id:user-agent:mime-version:content-type; b=jtKbobeOUfnfBf2Fw9X3W3wKwIU1GW1Mdj+NKgJa/m+qHz6mmib7OWrphfsmFnZ19a oQrrhnuEfuO9BSPSca++VrzSRqhKfGE8bqNZ14TSNdSLmm5gVyt7xcKYj6Jiug7QeYOf QnLa2jHCoIt4JtM+mveocQ1mngdE80kWneanY= Original-Received: by 10.68.4.228 with SMTP id n4mr242460pbn.518.1308203261543; Wed, 15 Jun 2011 22:47:41 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from JAMBU-NETBOOK ([115.241.113.33]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id i7sm673163pbj.42.2011.06.15.22.47.37 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 15 Jun 2011 22:47:40 -0700 (PDT) Mail-Followup-To: Miles Bader , rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org, Antoine Levitt In-Reply-To: (Miles Bader's message of "Thu, 16 Jun 2011 13:34:10 +0900") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (windows-nt) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-Received-From: 74.125.83.169 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:140541 Archived-At: > Richard Stallman writes: >> On the other hand, to convince the people doing that activity to also >> mention "free software" is an achievement for the movement. > > I agree, but it seems a very good idea to be as polite as possible > about these things, as it's very likely they're not making an > intentional decision to omit Free Software. Why shouldn't the researcher choose his words to suit the style of the person he is talking to. It is a publicly documented fact that Richard loves or prefers certain words (== way of thinking) in preference to the others. It seems to me to be an error of omission from the researcher because he hasn't simply done his due diligence either in the Choice Of the Mailing List or the Choice of the Subject. (Sorry Mr.Carver) > Saying something like "I won't answer your survey unless you change > it" seems unnecessarily combative, at least as an initial response. assert(unpalatable != combative). For christ's sake, Have we never had out Mamas shout at us? "Change the style, Be Polite and get more supporters", seems an empty argument for political correctness, I believe. Richard has come a long way in his campaign and for the intelligent person that he is, would have already come to either of the following conclusions - 1. being polite or not polite makes no difference to the campaign. 2. being "combative" is actually mildly favorable, contrary to mass opinion, I believe nobody has asked Richard why he gets so upset when certain cursed words are put forth to him. That's the only right approach to take rather than take a moral high ground and advise him to be polite. I personally believe that being rude has it's uses. Being politically correct and going by the book is for the meek who serve the world and not who desire to change it. "Whatever works and Whatever does no harm" should be the motto. Let's not reform the reformer but put our wieght behind him. The next time some one pops up in this list why not it be one of us (who are too proud of our polite demeanour) frontend the allegedly impolite man. ps: I will not make any more posts on this subject. Jambunathan K. > > -Miles --