Steven D'Aprano wrote:
On Wed, 4 Aug 2010 02:36:28 am samiam@moorecad.com wrote:
-------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: Quo vadis, GPC? From: Steven D'Aprano steve@pearwood.info Date: Tue, August 03, 2010 8:39 am To: gpc@gnu.de
I won't do what you wrote justice by quoting it.
How very ironic that you have written your email in such a way as to falsely attribute what YOU said to ME.
However, you have misquoted me
I, on the other hand, gave you the respect and justice of quoting you exactly rather than making vague accusations of wrong-doing. To accuse me of misquoting you when anyone who checks your original email will see that I quoted you correctly speaks volumes. This is the internet -- your original post is archived for everyone to see:
http://www2.gnu-pascal.de/crystal/gpc/en/mail14805.html
and people can see that I did not misquote you, as you accuse, but quoted you correctly.
Sadly, it isn't the first time. I've seen it before, both on Usenet and in private mail exchanges. That's why discussions with Scott are often unproductive. At some point he makes some bold statement (like in this case: "GNU wishes to produce software that cannot be legally used for paid work, or the basis for paid work.") and when presented with counter-evidence, he just quits the discussion under some pretense. (Yes, pretense -- calling a ridiculous statement ridiculous is not an insult, Scott. [1])
I note he also choose to ignore my reply (http://www.gnu-pascal.de/crystal/gpc/en/mail14806.html), even though he apparently couldn't find any "insult" in it, even by his standards. I asked him by PM about it and waited a week; since he didn't reply, I have to assume he was just looking for an opportunity to weasel out when he ran out of arguments. I have only one word for such behaviour: childish.
Now, I was blunt, and I don't expect him to reply anymore, so as a farewell remark, Scott, let me just say that I don't think you've helped your agenda to spread Standard Pascal by alienating the community that (in your words) "backed the standard when few others did".
[1] I still wonder where you get this idea from that GNU doesn't allow paid work, or why you get so upset about the fact that some people do use it for paid work. It may be that free software doesn't suit your business model; fine, but denying that it can suit anybody else's, when living proof to the contrary is present in this very discussion, is just absurd. This is no insult, that's just stating the obvious.
Frank