2 ms·
> I have not actually addressed the comments RMS made about the use of the word "assault" - I haven't used that word in any of my remarks. And I don't think tha
by bscphil 7y ago
> I have not actually addressed the comments RMS made about the use of the word "assault" - I haven't used that word in any of my remarks. And I don't think that in any of my comments, I have denied any quotation you have attributed to RMS.
OK, sure? I guess in that case I'm just confused about why you replied to the comment you did. My comment was that what RMS said [about assault] was simple and straightforward. You replied, saying, "it's actually not so simple". If you weren't actually disputing my claims about RMS, I guess I'm just totally lost on the point of what you were replying to in my comment.
- denton-scratch 7y agoWell, yeah, pretty sure. I don't think you have attributed any quotation to RMS. You are being a little bit slippery, though. RMSs entire post to the CSAIL list concerned his objections to the accusations levelled against his late friend and colleague. He specifically objected to the use of the word "assault". You said that RMS had expressed his defence "in simple terms"; I questioned that, pointing out that his post was sophisticated, and required a close reading. Now you are saying I have denied things that I have not denied; and asking me to re-read your posts, as if I have mis-read your remarks; but I have not.