[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Accessibility] Call to Arms

From: Eric S. Johansson
Subject: Re: [Accessibility] Call to Arms
Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2010 17:36:01 -0400
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv: Gecko/20100713 Thunderbird/3.1.1

 On 8/1/2010 1:59 PM, Richard Stallman wrote:
     >  What is so difficult about sticking to our principles?

     I  am sticking to my principles.

I have not asked you to do anything that goes against your principles.
If your principles are incompatible with working in the GNU Project,
you don't have to do it.

yes you have richard, you want me to put the need for free software before the needs of disabled users. my path leads users to ever freer environments. your path rejects them because they are not pure and then expects them to reverse course after they have invested heavily in nonfree solutions. the religious conversion path only works if you can execute or punish all nonbelievers. the slow path is a much bigger win re: linux, gnome, openoffice,...

You are persistently trying to make the GNU Project abandon its
principles, and you criticized me for finding it "difficult" to depart
from them.  That is insulting and hostile.

insulting and hostile?? I am not asking you to abandon you principals, I am asking you to look at the bigger picture. accessibility is bigger than free software while at the same the code must be free for maximum social benefit. your principals are a subset of mine.

I have treated you with respect, irritation, humor, and even kindness. I have put up with your unwillingness to see other points of view. I have offered compromises and received none in return.

you have driven me, a long term supporter away. I see how the fsf principals while beneficial to freeing software are actively harmful to addressing social needs. I leave you with a few quotes from the fsf web page and questions they raise.

from the fsf web site:

"""Free software is simply software that respects our freedom — our freedom to learn and understand the software we are using. """

does this mean that if you are disabled and prevented from using nonfree software in conjunction with free software, that the disabled are denied this and other fsf supported rights??

"""Free software is designed to free the user from restrictions put in place by proprietary software,"""

does this mean that fsf principals should be used to force disabled people to live under the restrictions put in place by proprietary software *and* the fsf?

"""Enter the free software movement: groups of individuals in collaboration over the Internet and in local groups, working together for the rights of computer users worldwide, creating new software to replace the bad licenses on your computer with community built software <> that removes the restrictions put in place and creates new and exciting ways to use *computers for social good*.""" (emphasis mine)

except if you are disabled and need a nonfree component to move to a more free world?

good night all. feel free to email me directly after this letter hits the list.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]