🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1993Jan2.043903.18936@husc3.harvard.edu> zeleny@husc9.harvard.edu (Michael Zeleny) writes:
>Your mission would be unexceptionable, and indeed laudable, were it
>not ineluctably involved with an attempt at a reprehensible semantic
>reform.  As it stands, your true mission is to self-servingly gloss
>the "Freedom is slavery" slogan of the Ministry of Truth.

The second ammendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees the right for the
public to keep and bear arms (well, it *tries* to).  This is a freedom to
bear guns.  This does not mean that the guns are free.

Someone leaving some form of incarceration might be heard to proclaim, "I am
free!"  There was a long-time movement to "Free Nelson Mandella!"  Does that
mean that the subject of each of those statements is available without
price?  Or even without restriction?  No.  Saying, "I am free!" means that
you are not captive, and that you are not prevented from some action.
Similarly with the software produced and owned by the FSF:  it is free, but
not free.  <<Liberte'>> au lieu de <<gratuit>>.

I personally don't see what the problem is.  "Free" *does* have more than
one definition in English.