4 ms·

RMS is a politician, dude; calm down. Let's look at the preceding sentences: > The Clang and LLVM developers reach different conclusions from ours because they

RMS is a politician, dude; calm down. Let's look at the preceding sentences: > The Clang and LLVM developers reach different conclusions from ours because they do not share our values and goals. They object to the measures we have taken to defend freedom because they see the inconvenience of them and do not recognize (or don't care about) the need for them. I would guess they describe their work as "open source" and do not talk about freedom. That's much more nuanced than "anything that isn't GNU isn't free". He thinks that their license is a lot different, because he has a particular definition of "free" that he's championed for decades. Putting "and this is what I mean by 'free'" into every statement would be more PR-friendly, but redundant for... anyone who's heard RMS speak or breathe for 30 years. If anything, this is a reasonable statement from a politician: "The Clang and LLVM developers reach different conclusions from ours because they do not share our values and goals." Maybe save the "what an asshole" comment for if he ever says, "LLVM hates freedom, GNU rules, BSD drools."

eropple 11y ago
While I see where you're coming from, and I don't agree with the way you've framed this. That idiosyncratic and generally unshared definition of "freedom" does, to me, make him (and his devotees) at least a little shitty when they attempt to claim moral superiority based on it. I feel the same way about other religionists who assert judgment based on their own pet beliefs, it's not an FSF-specific thing.
- michael_storm 11y ago
  Yeah, agreed that it's a shitty, though effective, rhetorical technique. I just think haroldp overreacted to it.
  - eropple 11y ago
    It can be effective, but you need a much, much stronger kind of charisma and a better grasp of rhetoric than Stallman or your typical FSF zealot. When delivered by somebody who gets spittle-flecked about this stuff, it makes you crazy and a jerk, instead of just a jerk.

eropple 11y ago

While I see where you're coming from, and I don't agree with the way you've framed this. That idiosyncratic and generally unshared definition of "freedom" does, to me, make him (and his devotees) at least a little shitty when they attempt to claim moral superiority based on it. I feel the same way about other religionists who assert judgment based on their own pet beliefs, it's not an FSF-specific thing.

michael_storm 11y ago
Yeah, agreed that it's a shitty, though effective, rhetorical technique. I just think haroldp overreacted to it.
- eropple 11y ago
  It can be effective, but you need a much, much stronger kind of charisma and a better grasp of rhetoric than Stallman or your typical FSF zealot. When delivered by somebody who gets spittle-flecked about this stuff, it makes you crazy and a jerk, instead of just a jerk.