that old GNU/Linux argument
olivares14031 at yahoo.com
Mon Jul 28 21:06:29 UTC 2008
> > > I too am beginning to chafe. You have not only
> > > tiresome,
> > > but, you are also not entirely credible; Mr.
> > > posted to
> > > this list on the 17th, conveniently starting a
> new thread
> > > which
> > > to all appearance was in response to this endless
> > > discussion, and
> > > if you are claiming that you are unaware of that
> > > then, you
> > > just completely lost me...you can't employ
> > > prevarications
> > > in the cause of great truths - it's the price
> you pay
> > > if you
> > > choose to mix metaphors and call what it is
> > > doing here,
> > > "evangelizing"...
> > Claude,
> > here's the proof that on 17th Day of June, 2008
> RMS posted this
> The only proof that is, is of a quite acute case of trying
> to fit
> facts to imagination.
You posted the same link here:
> Anyone who reads that link:
> a) sees Stallman didn't "start" any thread
who cares if he wrote it or not, it is there and can be proven and confirmed by your link.
> b) sees the content is not related to "GNU/Linux vs
> Linux" naming
> but to a fake GPL4
GPL is also being discussed here.
$ uname -o
is engraved already. Cannot be removed other than with a trick using sed. This is irrelevant in the GPL case.
> c) sees that you're trying hard for people to believe
> it's proof
> just because it's a link and don't follow it to
You posted it also, how is it different from the one I posted?
> d) then concludes something fishy is going on with your
How about your intentions? You also insulted Claude because he wrote to this thread. How does that compare. Not because people do not agree with you, you have no right to insult them!
Then when people question you, you pull out the Netiquette crap. You are the one that should begin by looking at it yourself.
More information about the fedora-list