I’m told my Stallman story hit Slashdot yesterday. Sure enough, in rolls the hate mail.
A systems engineer for a newspaper says he’s shocked to find an article that took a side in an argument rather than presenting a he-said, she-said approach. He goes on for a while but the line I liked was this:
“Unpleasantly biased writing.”
I actually thought it was pleasantly biased; but I guess that’s my bias showing through again. And, um, have you read Forbes before?
Writes “man-chicken” at Comcast.net:
“I found the article to be largely premature, and untrue. … I hope in future you will encourage reporters to be more honest, and less ignorantly inflammatory.”
Of course we’re getting the usual demands (in this case implicit) that I be fired for writing something that FSF fans don’t like. “Martin” from England claims to be a bigtime Forbes reader but now he is disillusioned:
“Up until earlier today I had always considered Forbes to be a source
of independant, intelligent business news. However after reading an
article entitled “Toppling Linux” by Daniel Lyons I’m having to
reconsider what your brand represents. … I appreciate the volume of correspondance [sic] you must recieve but would greatly appreciate a response from you, saying whether you consider this to be of a acceptable level of journalism and if not, what action you plan to take.”
Have no fear, Martin. I’m to be drawn and quartered at sunrise tomorrow.
And finally there’s this one, with the usual Free Software fanatic’s appeal for re-education (you know, like the kind they used to do in the Soviet Union):
“Wow, what an utterly mis-informed article. You really don’t understand the Free Software movement. Please, take an hour and listen to the FLOSS Weekly podcast #13 with Eben Moglen. He does a great job explaining the history of the GPL and why it is the way it is. Please, educate yourself before writing such awful articiles.”
Yes, if I would just sit down and listen to Eben Moglen’s podcasts, well, then I’d have the truth, right?
Well, none so far have the truly massively unhinged and venomous quality that I’ve come to expect from Free Software nutters. You know, the kind of hatred and anger that only “peace-loving,” “freedom-loving” people can muster up. But there’s still time.
RSS
4 responses so far ↓
Nathaniel // October 27, 2006 at 3:19 pm
I have just one question… what did you hope to accomplish with your article? Because, even after reading it a couple times, I still can’t see your reason for writing it.
By the way, Free Software people aren’t hateful. Slashdot is NOT a good place to read about free software “nutters”, as most of them are rude and immature.
“Well, none so far have the truly massively unhinged and venomous quality that I’ve come to expect from Free Software nutters. ”
I’d love to hear back from you if you have time.
Dan Lyons // October 27, 2006 at 4:31 pm
I’m sorry you can’t see the reason for writing it. That, I guess, is why you didn’t write it. I wrote it because it was very interesting to me that RMS was putting all of Linux at risk. I met yesterday with the CEO of a tech company — a 30-year industry veteran with experience at DG, IBM, MIPS, SGI, among others — who found the article immensely interesting. That was gratifying to me since he’s exactly the kind of reader I’m hoping to reach. I’m sorry you didn’t like the article; but you can’t please everyone.
As for “Free Software people aren’t hateful.” Well, not *all* of them. But if you’d been on the receiving end of some of my mail over the past few years I think you’d have a different opinion. I’m not talking about mean flame mails. I’m talking about threats of physical harm.
Gerd // October 29, 2006 at 5:58 pm
Come on, your article was a Trollpost, aimed to provoke persons with better knowledge than you.
You wrote: “Richard M. Stallman is a 53-year-old anti-corporate crusader who has argued for 20 years that most software should be free of charge.”
I mean. Who is the uninformed troll here. I don’t like Richard, not at all, but keep the facts straight.
” He and a band of anarchist acolytes long have waged war on the commercial software industry, dubbing tech giants ‘evil’ and ‘enemies of freedom’ because they rake in sales and enforce patents and copyrights – when he argues they should be giving it all away. [...]”
In fact patents have no meaningful role in software business, because they invalidate your copyright and serve no useful purpose rather then fill the pockets of lawyers. Regardless what developers think about his GPL advocacy, I respect that he was an early defender of the free market here. And in the field of patents he is a lonely advocate and has no community. The organised software patent opponents are very sound persons.
“As for “Free Software people aren’t hateful.” Well, not *all* of them. But if you’d been on the receiving end of some of my mail over the past few years I think you’d have a different opinion.”
When someone writes garbage and offends other persons with uninformed comments, no wonder people get angry. It is a mistake to be nice to journalists. Journalists who deceive their readers or write with insufficient knowledge will be held responsible by their readers.
Your argument level was vulg, so you get beaten by those you offended.
“I met yesterday with the CEO of a tech company — a 30-year industry veteran with experience at DG, IBM, MIPS, SGI, among others — who found the article immensely interesting.”
Sure it is intresting. Some persons are stupid, some are diplomatic. It speaks for journalistic standards to reach out for them with your demogogic article.
Just to clarify: I don’t agree with Stallman. But criticism has to be better informed, your learning curve… Because Stallman really deserves good criticism.
Dan Lyons // October 29, 2006 at 6:20 pm
Thanks for your note Gerd. You seem quite angry. I hope you get some help for that. Maybe you should talk to some of the kernel engineers or the folks at OSDL to get their perspective.
Like gas stations in rural Texas after 10 pm, comments are closed.