Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: in-tree pristines fatally wounded (merge-fest etc)

[Tom Lord]

    > From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" <address@hidden>

    > It's funny how many folks agree with your basic principle, though:
    > "social responsibility applies to people much richer than me,
    > including me in the unlikely event that I get that rich some day."

That is not my principle and I don't think I've ever met anyone who
would agree with that principle.  As in many other parts of your
message, you've _caricatured_, not paraphrased, wrapped the caricature
in quote marks, and attributed it to me.  (I admit that it's a funny
caricature.)

It would be closer to say: "certain social responsibilities apply"
rather than "social responsibility applies" and to say "with more
power" and "that powerful" rather than the less inclusive "more rich"
and "that rich".  Other than Ayn-Rand-toting sophists in freshman dorm
rooms, and now perhaps you, I don't think I've ever met anyone would
would _disagree_ with that more careful statement.

As nearly as I can tell, the debate, when there is one, isn't about
the _existence_ of those extra responsibilities, but about their
nature and about how to respond to them wisely.

-t