Re: Regarding OOXML and Microsoft patents

There wasn't any name calling. Just statement of facts.

That they aren't favourable... well, saying someone is parroting obvious
talking points is far from calling anyone a fanatic, but maybe that's
just me.

On Tue, Jul 31, 2007 at 11:10:32PM +0200, Christian F.K. Schaller wrote:
> Hi Richard,
> As someone who believes strongly about many things, yet to my knowledge
> always argues the case and never the person I don't see why you are
> coming out defending such behavior here. My criticism was mainly about
> the tone of the debate and for someone who himself never resorted to
> name calling in this discussion I don't see why you feel its defensible
> behavior.
> Christian
> On Tue, 2007-07-31 at 16:22 -0400, Richard Stallman wrote:
> > Since I do not read what Microsoft says in standards group meetings, I
> > thank Rui for informating us that it matches what Miguel de Icaza said
> > here.  Putting that similarity together with the nature of his
> > statements (vague claims that that the criticism of OOXML is flawed),
> > it becomes a cogent argument to mistrust those statements.

This statement is false.
Today is Boomtime, the 66th day of Confusion in the YOLD 3173
+ No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown
+ Whatever you do will be insignificant,
| but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi
+ So let's do it...?

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