The crux;; Re: [yavor at doganov.org: Re: Defining Free Software Business]

[Sam Liddicott]

Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
>    You find some of us talking about evils that you or the FSF don't
>    need; but we need them and we know people who need these evils.
>
> No, you don't.  
So you think I'm going to get someone to convert an access database 
without using a tool that DEPENDS on access? And even worse if I write 
or support such a tool?
> You should write free software alternatives and simply
> not use the non-free ones.  
I think you may not have noticed that most of my so called troll was 
talking about the tools needed to move people away from using non-free 
tools. You may not have noticed but I think most of those still bothered 
to follow this thread will have noticed. They can draw their own 
conclusions which will be reflections on the idiocy of one or both of us.
> You have the tools.  RMS didn't.
>   
The tools mostly being the gcc chain, I get the idea. I'm grateful; but 
all Mr Jones who has not quite got round to paying for MS Office Pro yet 
can hear is "wha wha wha." He's still trying to get his head around 
access and the FSF are telling him to use a C compiler to convert to 
anything else - anything at all- anything will do as long as it is GPL, 
preferably also GNU.
> The rest of your mail is just trolling.
>   
Well, I call your response troll, and unlike you I can say why:
I explained how some non free software must be used in ways to move 
people away from non-free software to free software, otherwise they will 
not choose to move. This to me is valuable support of free software and 
will bring the MONEY to free software porting and development.

You respond by saying "stop using non-free software, use free software"

- this is what I am TRYING to get OTHER people to do, and I'm showing 
you that the only path they are willing to take is not cold-turkey 
because they would be out of business.

It flatters me that you think I am a troll, I cannot simulate the logic 
or stance that you are coming from.

I believe that the only understanding we have in common is the use of 
some pronouns. I cannot understand why you think a genuine and relevant 
post is a troll but I have noticed your trend of cutting from replies 
anything that detracts from your responding attack so that you can 
dismiss it in absentia, rather than point out individual flaws.

It appears that you do not even believe that my reasons are genuine for 
thinking that "only free software from now on" will exclude great good, 
it appears that you believe I am faking this stance in order to generate 
flames.

I am almost determined to pay my FSF membership to Debian instead, the 
main blocker being that it is too hard to donate money to Debian (or was 
the last time I tried).

Since talking to you I have become convinced that nothing more that the 
FSF does (apart from license compliance) will ever be relevant to me or 
anyone I know; the FSF has done its job of freeing up development tools 
and providing the GPL, it is obvious that the work of bringing free 
software to the commercial world must be done by a different 
organisation who can at least distinguish the possible from the ideal. I 
now realise that the GBN will never be relevant in this work, the GBN 
will do nothing more than promote consultants who are already members of 
the FSF to accidentally explain to hundreds of businesses the commercial 
impossibility of them ever moving to free software.

Sam