Comment by Normal_gaussian
5 years ago
Please be aware that you are going out of your way to construct a scenario where Don is being insincere and even malicious; there is hipocrisy in your demands for specific evidence in your first comment and your assumptions in this one. There are other ways to bring your interpretations to the table, ways that allow thoughtful discussion and so won't see your comments categorically rejected.
> there is hipocrisy in your demands for specific evidence in your first comment
You must refer to the post written by CameronNemo. Those aren't neither "my demands" nor my comment.
Yep, I believe totally in those hypothetical women putting plants in their room because "Stallman can't stand being in the same room as plants". The trick is working great it seems.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fb/Eg...
http://blogs.laprensagrafica.com/litoibarra/wp-content/uploa...
Is also obvious that the man is afraid of trees and nature in general
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Stallman_Jadwisin_9....
Real phobias are serious medical problems causing a lot of anxiety and pain in people that just can't avoid being afraid. Is not funny stuff to gossip about it. I think that spread the rumor of somebody having a phobia is, if not malicious, at least of very bad taste. Specially when several documents show the opposite behavior.
And if you say that this wrapped thing is a gerbil, well... Solid evidence. All packages with that shape contain a live gerbil inside. The more expensive Tesla cars even have four squirrel units inside for feeding the battery.
For completeness sake: I was referring to your first comment where you demand proof for all possible interpretations.
That said, it now seems both of you have gone massively off the deep end becoming very involved and abusing the edit function to further arguments where you talk past each other, so I both regret saying and reading anything.
That's true, those weren't your demands, but you're the guy who doesn't believe the women, and called my friend a creepy spoiled brat while lecturing me about civility.
Defending RMS's love of trees isn't the hill I'd choose to die on. If you really don't believe her, re-read what that wise woman wrote 35 years ago about RMS groupies, and tell me that it doesn't apply to you today:
>Yet I still hear people I love and respect talk about him as if he were some kind of deity, as if his Free Software Foundation were the noblest effort in the world. It is admirable, yes. But to glorify the thoroughly sick human being behind it into some sort of whole-life messianic figure is unconscionable. Meeting RMS groupies was yet another contributing factor to my punting of the computer world for the time being. So many of the "hackers" out there (hackers, not crackers/urchins/destructoids) seem to have their external values totally fukt. Sure, we're all entitled to different values. Fine. But it grieves me to see good people withering away behind a self-imposed wall of lonely techno-perfection, their frantic efforts to acquire friends and lovers made all the more poignant by the desperation in their eyes, voice, manner. Most of them know that they are lacking something important, but don't know what it is, or how to get it, or who to ask for it. Many can see themselves alienating people or spurning offers of friendship and affection, but don't know how or why they're doing so. They just look impassive and bored and in control, and damn themselves silently in their minds, self-inflicting the rejection and pain that they feared from the outside.
> you're the guy who doesn't believe the women
Nobody should believe "the" women. Not more that we should believe "the" men. Everybody can have hidden agendas. Being a woman is not a proof that somebody is not lying. Moreover. In fact, nobody should believe "me", or "you". Specially when there are a pattern of dissonances between what somebody claims, the quality of the proofs shown and the easy to find facts that don't match what is claimed.
> re-read what that wise woman wrote 35 years ago about RMS groupies
To start, she seems to have a poor and 'holier-than-thou' opinion about all [male] hackers that describes as "fu*d people", and this is not a good sign in my book.
I doubt also that RMS would have a lot of "groupies" or fame in 1986, five years before the first Linux. If something was proven with time is that he was right, and that the "such smart woman" was clueless as a blind chicken about the future impact of the FSF. Your example would be like talking about how disappointing was the impact to Bill Gates to our society at 8 years old.
> called my friend a creepy spoiled brat
Maybe is a great guy, but in this two photos it surely looks like one. You are not doing him any favor showing them here.
7 replies →