RE: [gentoo-amd64] Re: How To Play WMV (thread drift - slaveryware)

[Bob Young]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: richard.j.fish@×××××.com [mailto:richard.j.fish@×××××.com]On
> Behalf Of Richard Fish
> Sent: Friday, September 29, 2006 4:20 PM
> To: gentoo-amd64@l.g.o
> Subject: Re: [gentoo-amd64] Re: How To Play WMV (thread drift -
> slaveryware)
>
>
> On 9/29/06, Bob Young <BYoung@××××××××××.com> wrote:
> > Would you go to war, or be willing to die for the "freedom" that open
source
> > provides? If not, then equating it with the freedoms that real mean and
> > women have fought and died for is to marginalize the importance the word
is
> > meant to convey.
>
> No, but that is *my* opinion.  However Duncan has stated previously
> that, while he probably wouldn't be willing to die to defend his
> freedom regarding open source software, that he _should_ be willing to
> do so.

That is a very crucial difference, and deserves not to be glossed over.
*Should* and *is* are two very different things. Men and women *have*
actually died to protect our freedom, to equate something that isn't
actually worth that ultimate price with the word, frankly, cheapens the
word.

>So by your standard, *his* use of those terms is really not
> all that far fetched.

See above.


> I do agree that the terms are very strong..much stronger than my
> feelings on the subject, which is why I do not use them.  But you
> really should read what Duncan has said previously on this [1].  His
> feelings are very strong on the subject...strong enough to justify his
> use of these terms IMO.

Feelings don't change the meanings of words, and meanings are not dependent
upon the feelings/perspective of the person using them.

--
Regards
Bob Young


-- 
gentoo-amd64@g.o mailing list