gag rule joke

[Siddhesh Poyarekar]

On 05/11/2018 07:02 AM, Richard Stallman wrote:
> I think you are saying that all of you were taken aback that I did not
> recognize your complete authority, which you considered indisputable.
> Some of you were incensed that I didn't accept that.
> 
> I think I can understand what that felt like, because I felt something
> along the same lines.  I was taken aback that you claimed total
> authority over GNU libc, since I never agreed to that.  I was not
> incensed, but I was shocked and alarmed.
> 
> The specific joke was the immediate practical disagreement that made
> us aware of the deeper disagreement.  But that joke was not terribly
> important in itself.  At least, not to me.  Arguments might convince
> me it is better to delete one particular joke, if I think they are
> valid.

Thank you, I think this is a good summary and basis to start off from 
when we resume discussions after the release.

> Humor pervades the GNU Project, because I am in favor of humor.  The
> name "GNU" is itself a joke -- a recursive acronym.  If you want to
> work on the GNU Project, you'll have to tolerate various kinds of
> humor.
> 
> That we have a serious purpose is not a reason to aim for
> humorlessness: "Ha Ha Only Serious" is a hacker tradition.  See
> https://stallman.org/articles/on-hacking.html.
> 
> To advocate a ban on jokes is to oppose a principle I hold dear.  I
> hesitate to delete any joke, if that would be appear to be an advance
> for a campaign to delete all jokes.
> 
> However, if is clear that the matter at hand is only one specific
> joke, arguments based on the specifics of the joke could convince me.

Without elaborating on this too much (since we are in a cooling off 
period) this is good to hear too and a very good basis to resume 
discussion after the release.

I think I'll have coffee for breakfast today instead of the mojito ;)

Thanks,
Siddhesh