🚀 go-pugleaf

In <NELSON.89Oct19222715@image.clarkson.edu> nelson@clutx.clarkson.edu writes:
> In <559@ncis.tis.llnl.gov> mcb@ncis.tis.llnl.gov (Michael C. Berch) writes:
>>    Regardless of the matter of the text of Alternative News Hierarchies,
>>    the fact remains that FSF considers that it "owns" the GNU mailing
>>    lists and is therefore the entire authority as to their content,
>>    despite the fact that operation of the lists/newsgroups are not paid 
>>    for by FSF but by a large number of cooperating sites including public
>>    universities and government sites that are legally prohibited from
>>    making gifts of public funds/facilities for private political advocacy.
> 
> Unfortunately for your cause, the price of FSF software is private
> political advocacy.  

I don't understand what this sentence is supposed to mean.  I don't
have a cause, and don't understand the concept of "the price of FSF
software".

> This price isn't reflected in the bottom line of
> the above institutions.  It is an easy price to pay.  Can you come up
> with the $$$ so that universities and government sites can afford
> "real" software?  Or are you going to write public domain software to
> substitute for FSF software?  Or are you going use *your* words to
> convince people to spend *their* dollars?  Or are you going to "pass a
> law"?

The above is so obtuse that I have very little idea what Mr. Nelson is
getting at.  Universities and government sites have no lack of access
to software; they tend to have among the richest computing
environments for a number of reasons, ranging from donations to
universities to deep discounts for government customers.  But what
does that have to do with support for FSF's political advocacy?  The
software that is distributed under the GPL could easily exist as
public domain software, which I stongly support.  Using the GNU
software does not, in itself, mean that one buys into the whole FSF
ideology.  All you have to do is abide by the GPL.  There is nothing
wrong with using GNU software at a publicly-funded site or distributing 
it via publicly-funded networks. There IS something wrong with use of
these sites and networks for the type of private political advocacy
that is engaged in by FSF in general, and Mr. Stallman in specific.

--
Michael C. Berch  
mcb@tis.llnl.gov / uunet!tis.llnl.gov!mcb