Comment by Forgeties79
3 days ago
> My point is that I have an issue with his tone and rhetoric, not with the thing he’s advocating.
This is often a hand wavy excuse by people who simply don’t agree with a cause and/or think it’s not important, but won’t admit it. If you don’t think what he is advocating for is important just say so. If you do, support him. You can’t possibly believe he’s so out of line that it’s worth prioritizing that opinion over the cause itself.
To be clear: I really do agree with his message, and I appreciate the tremendous impact he has had in the right to repair, DRM and all these things. So in that sense, I support him.
It’s just that his style is really appalling to me. Am I not allowed to criticize his style while at the same time supporting his stance?
I think it’s unfair to then imply I must not be admitting that I’m against his cause and using it as an excuse, because nothing I have said indicated this.
I don’t doubt that but the issue is you’re doing the work for detractors when you put more emphasis on his an exact approach rather than focusing on the quality of the cause and the fruits of his efforts.