4 ms·
Kottke called Stallman's rider (the whole thing) "crazy and amazing". Then he quoted the parrot thing, probably because it tickled his fancy. I don't agree that
by funkah 15y ago
Kottke called Stallman's rider (the whole thing) "crazy and amazing". Then he quoted the parrot thing, probably because it tickled his fancy. I don't agree that that constitutes "ridicule", in Winer's words.
- jakejake 15y agoI feel like those guys are projecting their own issues onto the situation. I didn't sense any malice in Kottke's post and certainly nothing that I would compare to high-school bullying.
- yawn 15y agoThat's how I read it, too. This whole thing is overblown and Kottke is being used as an excuse for some drama.
- gojomo 15y agoIndeed – Kottke didn't indicate shunning-disapproval or even necessarily 'ridicule' (as both Winer and others downthread summarize Kottke). Kottke's chosen words aren't always meant negatively. ("Here's to the crazy ones...") In Kottke's context, he's given a fair description: the rider is, objectively, quite peculiar and illuminating about Stallman's intense priorities. But whether a reader takes that as a reason to shun and ostracize Stallman, as with disrespectful 'ridicule', is up to the reader. Do we think Kottke would counsel Stallman, if we were in some bizarro universe where Stallman sought others' advice, not to include those two paragraphs, because they're too ridiculous? I think it's equally likely Kottke would chuckle and say, "the bit about the parrots is crazy and brilliant, better even than the Van Halen thing... move it up higher!" Read Stallman charitably. Read Kottke charitably. Read everyone charitably.
- nmcfarl 15y ago> Read Stallman charitably. Read Kottke charitably. Read everyone charitably This! Always, every day. You might make the world a little bit better in the process, but you will make your life a good bit less stressful, just by being a bit more charitable, a bit less suspicious.
- ajross 15y agoHow is selectively quoting something from a larger document in order to call it "crazy" not ridicule? That sounds like the very definition of "ridicule", no? If Kottke wanted to go into a discussion about whether or not this kind of rider is helpful or hurtful to RMS's cause, that would be productive. But this is a full-on put down, done in public. If this isn't ridicule, then what is?
- jaylevitt 15y agoWhen I read "crazy and amazing", that "crazy" reads like "wild, man". Not "idiotic".
- funkah 15y agoAny quoting is going to be selective. What is he going to do, quote the whole thing? Also, Kottke's whole deal is curating unusual, interesting stuff on the web, and I would say this rider is definitely both unusual and interesting. This is just what Kottke does, he points to stuff and says "hey, look at this." Maybe you have a problem with that entire enterprise, in which case fair enough, but he's not doing anything with respect to the rider that he doesn't do for whatever else is on the web that day. I agree that "crazy" is not exactly high praise, but it's a very overloaded term these days. I don't think it's meant to be as mean as Winer and everyone else is taking it.
- Fliko 15y agoI was disappointed in Kottke with the fact that he didn't know why Van Halen had requested brown free bowl of M&Ms in his contract. (It was so he would know if the stage crew read the contract which contained safety info on their equipment, to help ensure that no one was harmed during the show, as they had some of the most complicated and dangerous stage equipment at the time)
- nmcfarl 15y agoThat's actually covered in the Snopes article Kottke linked to.
- ngkabra 15y agoIt is very likely that Kottke does know about the reasons behind Van Halen's free bowl of M&M's since the link in his article is to the Snopes page that exists for the sole purpose of explaining those reasons.
- Fliko 15y agoAhh, didn't even notice that, and I have to admit that Kottke's article didn't seem very hate mongering.