Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 16th Dec 2009 00:13 UTC
Gnome In the item we ran yesterday about GNOME and the GNU Project, one aspect got snowed under a little bit. It turns out a claim made in the iTWire article about the role a blog post by Miguel De Icaza was false, and even though the claim wasn't ours, I did repeat it, and therefore, should correct it too. I also need to offer apologies for not framing the opening of the article clear enough - had I framed it better, a lot of pointless discussion and name-calling could've been avoided.
Thread beginning with comment 399971
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
segedunum
Member since:
2005-07-06

Behdad made it very clear that the trigger was not Miguel.

It doesn't prove a thing one way or the other. We know that the whole trigger for the thing was many blog posts made on Planet Gnome (we don't know which ones, obviously) and that post is certainly a prime candidate.

Probably because RMS weighed in in his role as FSF bigwig.

That was no reason to make RMS the sole topic of conversation in an article that was titled something completely different and wasn't about RMS other than the fact that he commented.

I don't know why people feel the need to completely lose track of a discussion topic when RMS's name pops into view and talk totally about him. Those people are, ironically, just as bad if not worse than RMS himself at times.

Half of this site is Thom's editorials. If you don't like that, I have no idea why you read it. There are plenty of other news sites out there that are far less subjective.

Yep, and that freedom of choice is why I feel free to make a comment on it. ;-) Telling people that they can go elsewhere won't change that.

Reply Parent Score: 4

katelin Member since:
2008-10-06

"Behdad made it very clear that the trigger was not Miguel.

It doesn't prove a thing one way or the other. We know that the whole trigger for the thing was many blog posts made on Planet Gnome (we don't know which ones, obviously) and that post is certainly a prime candidate.
"

You clearly did not read Behdad's email nor Luis Rocha's comment. They are the only 2 people who have commented that know the full details of who complained and about which blog posts/etc and they have both agreed that Miguel's blog post was not among the list of complaints.

Therefor, you are wrong. Accept that fact and move on.

Reply Parent Score: 1