Re: The Free Software Definition - Free Software Foundation

["Bill Buckels" <bbuckels@mts.net>]

"mdj" <mdj.mdj@gmail.com> wrote in message 
f916cc6c-bc9c-425d-b9ea-215dc798660e@f37g2000pri.googlegroups.com">news:f916cc6c-bc9c-425d-b9ea-215dc798660e@f37g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
>> http://www.fsf.org/blogs/community/boycottTrendMicro.html

>Yet another example of Company A trying to sue Company B out of existence 
>using a questionable software patent. Yes, there's a lot of this sort of 
>thing in our industry and I agree it's destructive.

The boycott is destructive and exemplifies world domination. Trend Micro is 
destructive and exemplifies barbaric behaviour and cut-throat business 
practices. Both show the left and the right arguably at their worst so I 
think this a perfect example of what is wrong with licencing and so forth.

It's what's wrong with Microsoft's history in shutting-down the little guys 
using cut-throat tactics IMO. But making alternative licencing too resictive 
for non-profit use is bad too IMO.

I'd like to use parts of GNU etc. in my own fun stuff but derivative policy 
of their licences combined with my own wish to Copyright my stuff without 
all their licencing hogwash prevents me.

>Oh dear. Bill, did you actually read that remark before posting it? 
>Thanks for the compliment.

That was an insult on some level too! It would depend on what kind of 
personna you decide to project in a group setting. You like the debating 
interaction and look for points in messages where you can have some fun. I 
certainly appreciate that.

Some OP's get impatient with that type of thread (sfahey for one) and 
probably consider it drivel. and by now considers my posts drivel as well 
and hopelessly OT. Others find it disturbing or unsettling. If I said the 
same thing to the folks who find this type of interraction unsettling it 
would be probably be construed as an insult. The impatient ones of course 
would consider it more drivel.

So you are welcome:)

>One thing I have learned is that once people start making fools of 
>themselves, they can do so without any further assistance from me.

So you are not a pitbull? In one particular case in the programmer group I 
remember you were called "Mutt" but that time I think she mangled your name 
as bait to drink your canine blood. I meant to ask you if you dipped her 
pigtails in the inkwell.

I get a srong visual image of Matt Jenkins as a little boy walking up to a 
house of cards that some other kid has painstakingly built and pulling-out 
one of the bottom cards, or throwing a stick into the front wheel of a 
bicycle some other kid is driving down the road. In both images little Matt 
has a strange smile on his face and he is curious as to the outcome. I can't 
think of a dog metaphor or anything analoguous in the animal kingdom that 
applies to this one.

I guess I'll need to remain a totalitarian fool (or is it total fool:)

For my complaint against Stallman I think we need a new arianism then to add 
to the lex of it all...

Something like "Stallmanist"

And finally I admit that my use of the word "totalitarianism" was incorrect. 
Further I indicated to you the other day that if you worked hard I would 
crumble and admit I was wrong. I decided to count the messages that google 
groups ate on you as more hard work on your part with the  proviso that I 
would never get sucked-in by you again on one of these debates as a 
corollary.

I just hate to lose.

Bill

PS - In the little Matt scenario above little Harry Potter is the kid with 
the cards and little Batgirl wearing a "DOG is DEAD" baseball cap is riding 
the bicycle, both victims of victim mentality.