Re: RFC: xemacsweb - XEmacs vs. GNU Emacs

Ben> if you make [RMS's] response most prominent, you're letting Ben> him have the last word once again! He'll get it anyway; that's my point. Personally, I've always thought that just posting that monolith of illogic and bile "as is" was the nastiest response we could make to it. But I guess I'm just too subtle.... Ben> face it, xemacs is in its death throes. what it desperately Ben> needs is advocacy, And then what? Advocacy won't overcome the inertial effect that the GNU name has. Ben> not moral high-mindedness. no one cares whether you take the Ben> moral high road or not if you die in the process. Knocking RMS is not the same thing as advocating XEmacs. Rather than explain why working with RMS is impossible, we should be explaining why XEmacs makes your life better. Sure, it's worth responding to him, but what we really need to do is to get it across why XEmacs is better than FSFmacs. differences are so perceptible. If you must attack something, find some way to emphasize the advantages of XEmacs over the FSF's version of Emacs, a la MySQL's "crashme" page. -- University of Tsukuba Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences Tel/fax: +81 (298) 53-5091 _________________ _________________ _________________ _________________ What are those straight lines for? "XEmacs rules."