[throwfoss]

Well someone should do it though. He's surely an ambivalent person. But the point "Open Source" vs. "Free Software" stands. Right now working at a company that has been violating the GPL (and somewhat celebrating themselves as Open Source contributors) makes me truly understand the difference. "Open Source" means just taking but "Free Software" also - at the very least - complying with licenses.

> To those who say we need him for GNU outreach: we absolutely don't. ANYONE would be better for the job.

If that was true, that would have happened years ago considering the controversies. (Although at this point everybody might see things differently) The subtleties of open source licensing seem to interest only few people, and even less understand them fully. (I don't count myself in)

[0atman]

I sympathise with your position, but is rms all we've got?

No developers were persuaded to change their language from 'open source' to 'free software' that day in 2009, him shouting at us was utterly ineffective.

We need good communicators, not just passionate people. I'm not suggesting he shouldn't write his good ideas down, but keep him away from an AUDIENCE.

[sph]

Meanwhile everybody knows what GNU is, who Stallman is, what free software is, and what that "lunatic", to paraphrase you, is all about.

His methods might've been of a lunatic indeed, but it's on you to argue that Free Software would have grown further than what it is today with a more mild mannered person at the helm.

I disagree completely with this proposition. You need crazy zealots to change the world: no one will accept their extreme view of the world, but choose a more moderate version of their message. And so the zealot has succeeded in his mission. Examples in history abound, whereas mild-mannered people don't go very far in radically changing the status quo.

[yoavm]

I don't think that the parent's point was that he was wrong or exaggerating, but that the way he communicated his messages is bad. I think it would have been great if he said "I think you mean Free Software, not Open Source, because..." but if he indeed screamed at people for making what's essentially a mistake, that seems needlessly rude and probably makes his messages unrelatable.

As someone that grew up with a lot of respect to RMS, hearing that this was how his talk went saddens me.

[micromacrofoot]

he hasn't done anything for GNU in over a decade, this is just preaching to the choir

[shawnhermans]

I stopped commenting on HackerNews years ago because of that same phenomenon. It doesn't matter if you agree or disagree with RMS. It isn't an excuse to act like a total asshole all the time.