Adam Wilson wrote: > If you're referring to the great "should" debate, then this is a pretty > inaccurate description of what happened. I inadvertently used the word > "should" as opposed to "it would be better if" (insert other > non-triggering alternative if it suits), and was promptly jumped by > everyone for being "intolerant", or "pushy", or some shit. > > People should (there it is again!) be free to advocate whatever views > they want, as well as pursue whatever course of action they may wish > without all this ridicule from the "open-source" gang- including > avoiding blobs, or thinking that perhaps, just maybe, non-free software > is a *bad thing*. > > But people should also be free to tell others how to act- it may come > across as rude, but I don't really care- it is an extension of freedom > of speech, provided there is no direct physical coercion involved. > > "Live and let live" is a touch ironic coming from the very people who > launch nit-picky attacks like the ones described in the first place.
I like the way you put my thoughts in words. Perhaps we should establish a club called "really free in open source communities" or something alike. The Donald Trump way ;) What helped me most is the definition of similar behavior by a wise man, who said, "the worst thing is, they think they are morally superior to judge" regards
