From: brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com   
      
   On Jan 25, 2026 at 7:38:18 PM MST, "CrudeSausage" wrote   
   <6976d39a$2$23$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:   
      
   > On Sun, 25 Jan 2026 19:08:50 -0500, DFS wrote:   
   >   
   >> On 1/25/2026 10:06 AM, Stallman Lackey Larry Piet (aka Farley Flud)   
   >> wrote:   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>> the great Dr. Richard M. Stallman   
   >>   
   >> He's NOT great, and he's NOT a Doctor.   
   >   
   > He's definitely not a doctor, but he did get an honourary doctorate. As   
   > for him being great or not, I will submit a question: would the world of   
   > technology naturally gravitate toward producing open-source software had   
   > it not been for Richard Stallman. There is reason to believe that   
   > Shareware would have existed even if GNU hadn't, but I doubt that would   
   > have resulted in a free operating system with its free set of   
   > applications, and the dogma that software should strive to open up its   
   > code.   
      
   You can grant Stallman influence without turning it into sainthood.   
      
   Yes, he mattered early: the GPL and copyleft accelerated one path to a free OS   
   stack. But the larger trend toward open source was already underway via Unix   
   culture, academia, BSD, the internet, and later Linux, Apache, Git, etc. The   
   ecosystem converged on open source because it works, not because FSF dogma   
   won.   
      
   And "greatness" is not just being early. Stallman repeatedly argued for   
   legalizing or normalizing pedophilia, bestiality, and necrophilia, and   
   minimized harm to children -– not as one-offs, but consistently over decades.   
   You can credit the license without granting the man moral authority.   
      
   --   
   It's impossible for someone who is at war with themselves to be at peace with   
   you.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)