Re: RFC: xemacsweb - XEmacs vs. GNU Emacs
"Stephen J. Turnbull" wrote:
>>>>> "Ben" == Ben Wing <ben(a)666.com> writes:
Ben> some time more recently, i rewrote my opinion piece; here it
Ben> is.
Thanks!
Sorry about the misattribution of "pusillanimous."
but i completely agree with it. xemacs has ZERO name recognition compared to
emacs outside [and inside, for that matter!] of the miniscule and insulated free
software community.
Ben> obviously i am not objective, but i think it's important to
Ben> have an "our side" piece to match rms's "their side"
piece
Ben> that we include.
I see your point. Personally, I'd like to bend over backward to give
RMS's response prominence. That looks "objective".
xemacs is not objective, obviously. nor is rms. rms will never put rebuttals
of his arguments on his site, and if you make his response most prominent,
you're letting him have the last word once again! face it, xemacs is in its
death throes. what it desperately needs is advocacy, not moral
high-mindedness. no one cares whether you take the moral high road or not if
you die in the process.
I like Martin's suggestion. What I would suggest as an implementation
is that I move my discussion under "Fear of Forking Considered
Harmful" to a separate page, and add links that that page, Ben's op
piece, etc, as explicitly personal opinions.
--
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."
--
ben
I'm sometimes slow in getting around to reading my mail, so if you
want to reach me faster, call 520-661-6661.
See http://www.666.com/ben/chronic-pain/ for the hell I've been
through.