Article View: gnu.misc.discuss
Article #722Re: LPF (Was Re: Lotus decision)
From: Robert Nagler
Date: Fri, 06 Jul 1990 19:49
Date: Fri, 06 Jul 1990 19:49
14 lines
1333 bytes
1333 bytes
In article <22730@megaron.cs.arizona.edu> gudeman@cs.arizona.edu (David Gudeman) writes: >...if not impossible, for Richard Stallman to keep his own more radical >views out of whatever LPF does. How many times have you heard of >political groups doing things outside of their charter ... While I don't necessarily agree with all the views of RMS (BTW, who does?), he comes across as being honest and altruistic. For example, he doesn't accept money from the FSF. The LPF is up against some big companies. If we choose to bicker about the integrity of RMS, we will certainly lose the war. How many political groups (coalitions) have failed by missing the forest for the trees? RMS isn't great, but he's all we've got (unless I hear any volunteers in the peanut gallery 8-)
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<173@munz.UUCP>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uunet!mcsun!cernvax!chx400!olsen!naglerReferences:
<22730@megaron.cs.arizona.edu>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uunet!mcsun!cernvax!chx400!olsen!nagler From: nagler@olsen.UUCP (Robert Nagler) Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.sources.d Subject: Re: LPF (Was Re: Lotus decision) Summary: RMS is not a politician. The LPF is important. Keywords: RMS, LPF, FSF, Computer law Message-ID: <173@munz.UUCP> Date: 6 Jul 90 19:49:38 GMT References: <22730@megaron.cs.arizona.edu> Reply-To: nagler@olsen.UUCP (Robert Nagler) Organization: Olsen & Associates, Zurich, Switzerland Lines: 14