David H. Lynch Jr. wrote:

quoted text
>>>> Hell, the OpenBSD ports tree should perhaps contain patches which

>>>> REMOVE such commercial operating system support.  That's a fork

>>>> Richard would surely approve of.

>>>>

>>>> Richard, your pants are full of hypocritical poo.

>>>>

>>>>

>>>     I have no doubt that in some context Richard is hypocritical.

>>> Though most of us would be hard pressed to structure our lives

>>> to be consistent with our beleifs and principles to the extent

>>> that he has.

>>>

>>>     But this is not about EMACS, nor is it about  hypocracy.

>>>

>> RMS made statements first.  RMS will pay for his lies.

>>

> Why did I even bother.

>

> I was not trying to defend RMS or attack you.

> I was actually looking at the possibility that there might be some way

> of getting something positive out of this

> for OpenBSD. There is an obvious win-win for everybody, but you are

> fixated on revenge for imaginary slights.

>

>

> This sounds like something from my eight year old. You are 30something,

> Grow up.

Sounds like an insult from you.
> Do you really write your own email, or do you have some kid do them for

quoted text
> you ?

> 

Sounds like an insult from you
> It is more important to you  to catch Stallman in some mis-statement or

quoted text
> lie than to even figure out what is best for OpenBSD ?

> Rather than figure out if there is anyway OpenBSD can benefit, it is

> more important to find a way to screw somebody else ?

> 

Sounds like an insult from you.
> Every once in a while you show rationality and intelligence, and I think

quoted text
> maybe there is some real value and real hope for

> OpenBSD, then you lob off a message like this one.

>

>> No.  Nothing begs the question of what we do.  We are not going to

>> change our process in any way as a result of what some loony retard

>> says.

>>

>>

>     So if Richard adopted the BSD/ISC you would switch to the GPL just

> to spite him ?

>

>> We know _exactly_ what our principles are, and we are sticking to them

>> very clearly.

>>

> Yes, the screw RMS, Screw the FSF, and screw the world, and screw

> ourselves principle.

> Because frankly I can't see where you are following any other.

>

> Your position on closed hardware and binary blobs is exactly the same as

> Stallman's,

> and logically leads to the same position on software.

> Yet so far I have gotten no position on software - aside from the claim

> that Stallman somehow insulted OpenBSD.

> The only way his remarks could be taken as an insult, would be if you

> actually have the same principles.

> Even then it would be more of an uninformed error than an insult.

> It is not an insult for him to claim that you tacitly endorse non-free

> software - if you do.

>

> Whatever your principles are you are sticking to them so clearly that I

> do not even think most of the  OpenBSD

> developers know what they actually are - well aside from the screw

> everybody else principle. That one seems abundantly clear.

> 

Look up how 'openbsd' was started and learn about the whole 'open' idea.

The open CVS server, open documentation, open drivers, etc.
Hmm maybe RMS won't recommend OpenBSD because it is open.. and being

open implies open source, which.. is not good.. it must be free

software, not open software.
>>>     From the perspective of OpenBSD values,

quoted text
>>>     How far does the OpenBSD disdain for non-free software extend ?

>>>

>> Richard does not stand in a position where he can ask that question

>> to us.  Nor do you.  We'll do what we want, and your questions don't

>> change anything.

>>

> Forget Richard, Forget me, Forget all the people you think have fucked

> you over.

Sounds like a childish insult from you.
> Instead of trying to figure out how to extract revenge, figure out what

quoted text
> is best for OpenBSD.

>

> There is nothing wrong with doing what you want.

> But it sure as hell looks as if you are more interested in making

> certain that you do NOT do anything that richard might want.

> That anytime he says black, you are going to say white.

>

> In many circles I am known for having nearly an absolutist position on

> Free Speech. 

IMO software has nothing to do with speech. It is about open code, open

development and even free of cost code at times to make it wonderful.

Software is like engineering electronic circuit blueprints.. it isn't

like a protest where you hammer on people's doors and talk about the

blood and gory of the protest on 99th street where everyone was holding

big signs and getting beaten by the police for bringing up censorship.
Nobody goes around talking about how grocery stores are censoring our

freedom by not giving us the chemical blueprints of Apples.
So if some guy releases a closed source piece of code and it happens to

work, who cares.. let them do that. It's just an apple without a blueprint.
Instead of just leaving the Apple alone, a free software hacker will

make extra effort to fight the grocery store for giving away an apple

without apple blueprints. Why not just leave it alone, and go on with

your open development and open code? Because free software developers

waste time on fighting the Apple instead of just developing open code.
Free Speech is why 'open' developers don't get along with free

developers.. because the whole free speech thing confuses everyone.
For example, I'd like for all GNU developers to stop censoring their

books, and consulting and stop holding a gun to my head whenever I want

a support contract.. that should be free, as in speech, and I shouldn't

be restricted. So what really is free speech? It is a vague, meaningless

phrase because if I apply free speech to consulting and books, then all

hardcover and paperback books should be opened and freed, as compiling a

book is censoring it only to those who can pay for the book. When you

take free speech to far, everything becomes censorship.. even the apple

in your store and the banana in your store which don't come with

molecular or atomic molecular blueprints.
All boxes of cookies do not come with exact molecular blueprints on

them. They only contain censored ingredients and no build instructions

for the cookies. Reality is free speech could be taken so far as to

demand all cookie boxes contain exact instructions on how every cookie

in the box was cooked and at what temperature. Some cookie vendors

simply don't have time for this nonsense, since they know that most

cookie eaters don't view the cookie as free speech, since the cookie

isn't speech.. just as software is not speech.. software is just code.

So stop the whole free speech nonsense and focus on open code. At least

that's what I do.
Methinks bsd is more of an open OS whereas GNU is more of a political

fight for our anti-censorship kinda toolset.
 > Your expressed  position is even more absolutist than mine.

quoted text
> Yet here you are telling others we can not even ask questions. My we

> have clay feet.

>

> Richard has actually answer the challenges you have thrown at him.

> In those instances where someone found that something that he

> recommended was not adhering to the standards he established,

> he commited to look into it and either fix it or revoke his recommendation.

> You refuse to deign to allow anyone else to ask questions.

> 

You are asking them right now, this is email.. anything goes. Stop worrying.
>

quoted text
>>>     Establish what your principles and policies are or are going to be.

>>>

>> We did.  Years ago.

>     I got it, OpenBSD is good, non-free software is good, but anything

> having anything to do with RMS is evil.

>

>     Seriously, nothing I have read of any OpenBSD policies and

> principles is inconsistent with Richard's on this issue.

>     If I am wrong about that, then OpenBSD has done a poor job of

> expressing its policies and principles.

>     If I am right you are cutting off your nose to spite your face.

>

>     This does not effect me personally one way or another.

>     I could give a rats ass about the future of OpenBSD.

>     Nor is this childish spat you seem to be having all by yourself

> with Richard

>     of any consequence to me.

>

>     Though I will conceede you are incredibly frustrating,

>     how the hell can somebody so obviously intelligent,

>      be so obviously self destructive and stupid at the same time.

>

>     If one person calls you an ass, that's there problem.

>     If ten people call you an ass, maybe you should think about it.

>     If everyone on the planet outside your own cult calls you an ass,

>     you are either the messiah or an ass. My money is on the latter.

>

>> Did you?

>>

>>

>     Do you have turrets or aspergers or some other reason why you are

> compelled to insult virtually everyone ?

Since when was 'did you' an insult?
>

quoted text
>>>     Adhere to them and THEN if they are consistent with Richard's

>>>     you can insist on his endorsement or burn him as a hypocrit.

>>>

>> We do adhere to our principles very exactly.  Richard does not adhere

>> to what he preaches.

>>

>> Richard came to our lists on a vendetta of hatred.  Richard lied about

>> our project.  Richard continues, and he won't stop, and therefore he

>> is an asshole.  He'll get what he deserves -- we don't drop this issue

>> now that he's gone so far.

>>

>>

>     Richard, Richard, Richard. You would think he is the anti-christ.

>     Forget Richard, look after your own interests.

>

>     Though Frankly, I suspect you will find that virtually every human

> outside the cult of OpenBSD,

>     that gives enough of a damn to read Richards remarks would conclude that

>     nothing he said insulted OpenBSD, and that they were accurate.

> 

I am not part of the OpenBSD cult, I just started using it a couple days

ago and I think that the whole 'openbsd isn't worthy of freedom' is an

insult since OpenBSD developers develop open and free software..but see

it is open and that might tick some people off.. since open is a very

very bad word. It is a swear word, in fact.
>>>     If you are unwilling to adopt policies consistent with his,

quoted text
>>>     accept that you are not getting his endorsement and shut this thread

>>> down.

>>>

>> Why do you get to tell people what threads should be shut down?

>>

>     Fine blather away as you please. Atleast Don Quite was fighting

> against windmills for a worthwhile cause.

>

>> Why don't you mail Richard and tell him to stop mailing our lists?

>> Or are you his little brother?

>>

>     I have e-mailed him. Pretty much the same thing I emailed you.

>     I sugested that since on this specific issue I could see no conflict

> between what I percieve to be  OpenBSD  values and policies, that there

> had to be someway to reach common ground.

>

>

>     But I do not speak for OpenBSD - you do.

>     And you seem to fixated on revenge for imagined slights to look out

> for your own or OpenBSD's interests.

>

>     There are values I share with you, some I share with Richard, and

> many I hold as my own.

>     I have had heated private exchanges with Richard on several topics.

>     But he has always been civil. He is a brilliant and shares many

> other traits with you.

>     But he seems matured past eight, and realize that that whining and

> ranting is not going to get him anywhere.

> 

You are ranting about his ranting.

Funny when you look in the mirror.
All ranters are always criticized for ranting, but this rant against

ranting is a rant itself.
Please see:
http://z505.com/cgi-bin/qkcont/qkcont.cgi?p=There-Are-Ranters-or-There-A...
>> There is no cooperation between FSF and OpenBSD, and if Richard keeps

quoted text
>> throwing poo at us, we will keep throwing poo right back at him and

>> his hyporcritical project.

>>

>     I got it, if the fate of the human race depended on cooperation

> between the two of you,

>     the rest of us need to bend over and kiss our asses goodbye,

>     You would rather eat dog shit than concede there is any issue on the

> planet that Richard is not wrong about.

>     If god came down and gave you a choice between a heaven with Richard

> in it and eternal damnation, you would pick

>     eternal damnation.

>

>>

>>>     Richard has offered you the oportunity to aquire his endorsement.

>>>

>> That's bullshit.  Richard came looking for a fight.  I don't think he

>> expected to look this much like a loser.

>>

>     Outside the cult of OpenBSD no one else sees it that way.

Actually, I started using OpenBSD a couple days ago. And I see Richard

coming in and encouraging this whole  unfriendliness cliche by saying

things like 'can't talk to Theo but I'm on this list' and 'OpenBSD is

not worthy of freedom' and 'OpenBSD encourages non-free stuff so much

that we can't even consider it free'.
Which are all exaggerated lies.. or excuses. The main excuse was that

'can't talk to Theo because he is unfriendly even though if I look in

the mirror I am the same, and any programmer who gets told lies is the

same'.
>     The few people who are paying attention are trying to figure out why

quoted text
> OpenBSD is more interested

>     in pissing all over RMS than looking after its own interests,

>     And Richard only looks stupid for beleiving there was any hope of

> rational discourse.

You spelled beleiving wrong.

Bwahahahhaha

Bwahahahhaha
>>

quoted text
>>>     With very little effort OpenBSD could be the most significant OS

>>> with Richard Stallman's impratur

>>>     certifying it as totally free.

>>>

>> We are free.  We don't need some uneducated guy who climbed up into

>> some high chair endorsing us; he is jealous of what we do, and that

>> noone else listens to him anymore.

>>

>     If he is so jealous, why are you the ones whining because you can't

> get anybody to give you any money ?

>     I read damn little besides sour grapes from the OpenBSD community.

>

>     I think Shakespeare might have some advice - "the fault is not in

> our stars, but in ourselves".

>     But what would I know, like Richard, I am just an uneducated twit.

>

>     From what I can tell GPL/LGPL projects make up almost 75% of  all

> FOSS projects, and BSD projects less that 6%.

75% of people have brains the size of a dehydrated pea

75% of people pay taxes to government

75% of people advocate C, the most insecure programming language.

75% of people read newspapers each day and actually believe them

75% of people have TV's, and actually use them

75% of people drink Coke, a drink that has no nutritional value

75% of people have brains the size of a dehydrated pea
 >     There are nearly as many projects under the new GPLv3 as the BSD

 > License.

 >     Even Torvald's has gone from dead set against the GPLv3 to being

 > willing to actually use it in some circumstances.

 >
Anytime Torvalds is brought up, it automatically voids the entire email.
>     All in all Richard has been doing quite well - despite graduating

quoted text
> magna cum laude from Harvard and picking up two honorary doctorates and

> 1 honorary professorship - this year.

Sounds like you are trying encourage a new jealousy flamewar now.
>

quoted text
>     If he gives a damn about OpenBSD at all, it is because if he could

> endorse it, he could use it as an effective club to beat on Linux

> distributions to get them to conform to his notions of free software.

> While gNewSense might actually be more popular than OpenBSD, OpenBSD is

> an actual real OS, with a real history even if it has damn few actual

> users.  "Am I not destroying my enemies when I make friends of them?"

> He is not jealous of you. He just wants to use you as a means to much

> bigger ends. But god forbid that you might actually benefit from that.

> "Alas, alas for you, lawyers and pharisees, hypocrites that you are!

> Sure that the kingdom of Heaven awaits you; you will not venture half so

> far."

>

>     I am not the leader of the RMS fan club, but personally, it seems

> like you can't figure out why he has the stature and attention he has,

> and you do not.

Sounds like you are trying encourage a new jealousy flamewar now.
>     Hey I can't figure out why Bill Gates is worth Billions and I am

quoted text
> not. But I am not letting it eat me up.

>

>     And while you are mail bombing Stallman - why don't you revive

> another childish blast from the past and lob a few kernel binaries at him.

>

>     Do you actually read the crap you write ?

Sounds like a childish insult from you, therefore a return favor is

possibly cooking up.
>     Please tell me that you have aspergers, or are a paranoid schitz, so

quoted text
> that there is a rational explanation for your behavior.

> 

Sounds like a childish insult from you.
What goes around comes around.
This is just email after all.
L505