Godwin's Law [LWN.net]

Godwin's Law

Posted Sep 27, 2006 1:05 UTC (Wed) by smoogen (subscriber, #97)
In reply to: Godwin's Law by GreyWizard
Parent article: Why Torvalds is sitting out the GPLv3 process (Linux.com)

You seem to not be able to read and digest information.

1) I said SOME people act like this. I should have capitalized the words that time, but every time I have done so in the past.. someone will still post exactly what you said.

My comments about Mao and Stalin comes from comments that several people said around the AI labs when I visited in the 1990's. Some people seem to believe that their is only one way that code should be licensed and those who disagree should be at best ignored, or sent off to a long retraining about the right way to think.

2) I can't use Godwin's law because I was trying to provoke it. Sadly the corrolary means that the GPLv2 vs GPLv3 license wars will go on for a couple more months.

to post comments

Hiding behind weasel words?

Posted Sep 27, 2006 13:04 UTC (Wed) by GreyWizard (guest, #1026) [Link] (5 responses)

I didn't claim that you compared ALL people who argue in favor of the GPLv3 draft to mass murderers. Since all the accused have actually done is post comments in a public discussion group, SOME is plenty. The implications of being "taken to a Gulag for some serious Reeducation in good old Stalin/Mao ways" are quite clear regardless of whatever weasel words you care to deploy by way of excusing yourself.

Hiding behind weasel words?

Posted Sep 27, 2006 16:22 UTC (Wed) by smoogen (subscriber, #97) [Link] (4 responses)

My words were mean spirited and did not help the talk. I thought they were funny at the time, but I should have realized that its humour was gallows at best, and horrible at worst. I would apologize, but it would just be more weasel words.

I used to love Free Software in its earliest sense, but I am sick and tired that EVERY time someone disagrees that the GPLv3 is what they want for their software, a large gang-press comes to re-educate them and drown out any possible dissent.

What's a gang-press?

Posted Sep 27, 2006 18:43 UTC (Wed) by robilad (guest, #27163) [Link] (2 responses)

I haven't heard that term before.

What makes you feel your dissent is being drowned out? Afaict, you've tried to label people you disagreed with as evil, so you got replies disagreeing with that.

Do you consider labelling people who disagree with you as dissent? I'm curious.

I enjoyed reading Ted Tso's mail today on LKML that goes into the linkage issues between the kernel and the glibc, for example, and came back with the idea that his dissent is based on technical issues. I also read Linus' 'fed up with the FSF' piece, and came back with the idea that his dissent is based on personal issues between him and the FSF, and philosophical considerations on what should be in the GPL.

I think that as long as he and his supporters, as well the other side, can keep their own personal issues out of it, they can manage to get to a workable compromise with each other. You'll have to find some mutual respect, though, or you all won't get that.

I don't think that's very likely for the next few weeks, though, as it's in both leaders' and their followers' nature to try to prove to the other guys that they are more clever first. So I expect to see this fun 'public debate on GPLv3' to continue for a while, while the real fixing will be done behind the scenes between OSDL, FSF and similar entities, anyway, in the usual 'undemocratic', 'intrasparent' way such things are done.

I'd guess that after the fixes are in, the undemocratic process will be just fine. :)

What's a gang-press?

Posted Sep 28, 2006 15:12 UTC (Thu) by sepreece (guest, #19270) [Link] (1 responses)

My guess is that "gang-press" was supposed to be "press gang". This was a military "recruiting" tactic of the past which allowed the Royal Navy, for instance, to round up people on the streets and "press" them into service.

What's a gang-press?

Posted Sep 28, 2006 15:47 UTC (Thu) by robilad (guest, #27163) [Link]

Ah! Thank you for the explanation.

Fair enough

Posted Sep 28, 2006 1:42 UTC (Thu) by GreyWizard (guest, #1026) [Link]

I commend your ability to admit that. There is nothing wrong with stating that you believe advocates of the GPLv3 draft are too aggressive but without knowning which particular comments you are thinking of that is hard to evaluate.

Godwin's Law

Posted Sep 28, 2006 15:16 UTC (Thu) by lysse (guest, #3190) [Link]

So, let's be precise here. Exactly how many people have lost their lives at the hands of the FSF's "zealots"?

Amusingly, but tragically, you're using personal derogatory terms to condemn the very people who tend to be first up against the wall when revolutions come - the people who say "non serviam", the people who don't just take everyone else's word for it, but stand up and do something to ensure the opposite point of view is represented.

Perhaps before screaming "zealots" or "Maoists" and frothing at the mouth yourself, you should consider exactly why you are so offended by people who have done precisely *nothing* to limit your freedoms - indeed who have, by standing up and pointing out why they're necessary, done a great deal to ensure you still have them.

(Your display of gratitude is, regrettably, all too common.)