Reply to post: Re: This is the end, my anonymous friend

GNU means GNU's Not U: Stallman insists he's still Chief GNUisance while 18 maintainers want him out as leader

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

Re: This is the end, my anonymous friend

There is a case made

A case that is demonstrably weaker and is now outlined much less clearly and with less evidence than the case for why you are harming the Pandas.

dismiss the fact that it was even written

You're dismissing the fact that the majority of people in this discussion have called for you to leave the Internet.

People write worthless drivel every day. That doesn't mean it should be taken seriously.

you're missing the bigger picture which was the substance of the rest of my comments

These are anecdotes at best. I have seen no evidence at all that "the behavior of its leader alienates a large part of those we want to reach out to" in any of these anecdotes you have linked to.

If Stallman wants to reject the argument made in the letter because he feels it's unsupported by evidence and the letter itself cuts no ice, he's free to do so.

He would be wise to do so, because as I've repeatedly stated no evidence gas been proffered. Your anecdotes don't even begin to address the issue of providing evidence that "the behavior of its leader alienates a large part of those we want to reach out to". a couple of dozen people does not make "a large part" of millions or billions.

I don't see how the "otherwise" clause follows

You asked for evidence or a rationale as to how you are harming Pandas rather than simply leaving the Internet based on how the majority in this discussion feel.

Stallman should engage with this "feedback"

What if the letter made the claim that Stallman was a reptillian and that his leadership of the GNU project was helping the illuminati bring in the new world order by spraying chemtrails in cooperation with the remnants of the nazis who are living in their secret moonbase on the dark side of the moon, coordinating with the dinosaurs that live inside the hollow earth? Should he respond to a claim like that, given with no backing evidence at all? Or is it OK to just ignore that and treat it as ridiculous?

As I've said, the onus is on the people who want change to show any kind of evidence at all to back up their claims and demonstrate that their letter warrants a response. This minority opinion does not warrant that in my view, and it won't until such evidence can be shown or until it can be shown that the opinion is held by at the very least a much more significant percentage of contributors, if not a majority.

But for that to happen the angry mob would have to stop bawwwing for five minutes and actually gather some data. So of course it won't happen. And until it does it should be treated with all the respect it deserves: Silence.

We're back where we started.

We sure are: with me saying that this letter is worthless as it makes no effort at all to back up any of the claims it makes, and you dancing (quite well, I must say) in artful circles ad nauseum to try to argue that evidence is irrelevant because feelings and minority opinions.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon


Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020