"When dealing with RMS, keep the following things in mind"(emacswiki.org)
emacswiki.org
"When dealing with RMS, keep the following things in mind"
http://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/RichardStallman
58 comments
I'll say giving a thoughtful reply to every random person that emails you is not really the best use of time.
Sure, it's great for you to get an answer and kudoz for the people who really have the time to do that.
Sure, it's great for you to get an answer and kudoz for the people who really have the time to do that.
It depends on the type of email. In general, when I give people thoughtful replies I learn something. But I can see this wouldn't be true for some categories of email.
> I know RMS is a special case but it annoys me when people say/act as if they're too busy to properly respond.
As far as I know, RMS does properly respond. He simply tends to be as terse as possible. Some people mistake it for rudeness.
As far as I know, RMS does properly respond. He simply tends to be as terse as possible. Some people mistake it for rudeness.
[deleted]
I don't know how many of you guys have ever actually contacted RMS, but whenever I did, his answers were quick, polite and to the point. Anecdotal, I know...
In 1998 I wrote some documentation and offered it to the GNU Project. To my surprise, I got a reply back from Richard directly. He was very pleased that someone had written such documentation and offered it to them. (I remember him using the word "Hooray!")
However, in retrospect, what I wrote was pretty poorly written. It was my first major attempt at documentation, and Richard critiqued it heavily. I felt very hurt, but he was probably kinder than he needed to be given the low quality of my work, and, more importantly, he was correct. Once I got past feeling hurt, I learned a lot from his critiques. I essentially got free training in technical writing from Richard, and I look back on that as one of the more awesome moments in my life in software.
However, in retrospect, what I wrote was pretty poorly written. It was my first major attempt at documentation, and Richard critiqued it heavily. I felt very hurt, but he was probably kinder than he needed to be given the low quality of my work, and, more importantly, he was correct. Once I got past feeling hurt, I learned a lot from his critiques. I essentially got free training in technical writing from Richard, and I look back on that as one of the more awesome moments in my life in software.
That is my experience as well, but the "to the point" part took a bit getting used to.
I'm sure it depends on the topic of conversation, your stance on said topic, etc., etc., too.
This is somehow different than other people?
Reminded me of this old Jamie Zawinski joke: http://www.jwz.org/hacks/why-cooperation-with-rms-is-impossi...
(ObOld: I remember the time when it was why-cooperation-with-rms-is-impossible.au, not .mp3)
(ObOld: I remember the time when it was why-cooperation-with-rms-is-impossible.au, not .mp3)
The applause he gets at the end of that "song" makes listening to the whole thing worth it.
[deleted]
He has very very little time, so his answers may seem impolite at times.
I always hear this but what is it exactly that he is doing that keeps him so busy?
I always hear this but what is it exactly that he is doing that keeps him so busy?
This is such a bad excuse. Being polite requires extremely little time, and it's a requirement for interacting with humans.
In my experience, autistic-ish people (often geeks or nerds) sometimes confuse being polite with being social, which does take time. They then seem to think that if they don't have time (or really, the skill and desire) to be social, then they don't have to be polite.
This is a minority of geeks and nerds, of course.
In my experience, autistic-ish people (often geeks or nerds) sometimes confuse being polite with being social, which does take time. They then seem to think that if they don't have time (or really, the skill and desire) to be social, then they don't have to be polite.
This is a minority of geeks and nerds, of course.
I think the statement that his answers may seem impolite is more a commentary on many people's inability to distinguish terseness from impoliteness. It's not saying that he's rude.
Maybe. I have indeed seen cases where nice but busy and terse people were incorrectly interpreted as rude. But from what I've read about Stallman, I'm more inclined to think he's kind of a jerk. Often, people who are busy, and especially people who are passionate like Stallman, tend to look down on other who don't share their passion.
This isn't the end of the world. I'm kind of a jerk.
This isn't the end of the world. I'm kind of a jerk.
many people's inability to distinguish terseness from impoliteness
That's exactly it, though. Politeness and terseness are often diametrically opposed in our society, and since there is no standard of politeness outside what society finds to be "polite", I'm not sure how you can say many people have an inability to distinguish.
If you email a long question to someone and they respond with "No.", many people would find this to be impolite or downright rude. It might be the most efficient thing and the hacker-type might think it's OK, but if most people think it's impolite, it is.
That's exactly it, though. Politeness and terseness are often diametrically opposed in our society, and since there is no standard of politeness outside what society finds to be "polite", I'm not sure how you can say many people have an inability to distinguish.
If you email a long question to someone and they respond with "No.", many people would find this to be impolite or downright rude. It might be the most efficient thing and the hacker-type might think it's OK, but if most people think it's impolite, it is.
That's because if it's a long question it generally requires a longish reply to explain to the other person why the answer is "no". Saying simply "no" strongly suggests that the other person's understanding is not worth your time, or that they should accept your answer without understanding it because you are higher status.
really? if someone sends me a long message and I respond with a few lines, it's quite difficult to not come across as rude. If you have a four page essay, if I am to reject or accept it in a few lines, I'm only addressing a few of your points.
How do I respond politely to a four page essay without spending a significant amount of time on it?
How do I respond politely to a four page essay without spending a significant amount of time on it?
Being polite takes very little time. Knowing what constitutes politeness takes a lifetime of study for some people, and when you travel as much as RMS does, that's a lifetime of study for anyone, autistic or no. Can you navigate social norms in every country he's been to (and worked in?) You're really oversimplifying.
He communicates mostly in Enlgish, it is certainly possible to learn politesse of your native language.
But if he as a human has to have some personal flaws, am fine with sacrificing that.
But if he as a human has to have some personal flaws, am fine with sacrificing that.
Possible, but not trivial as Jess considers it.
Furthermore, politesse is not a lingual phenomenon. The politesse of a Texan is different from a New Yorker is different from a Minnesotan is very different from a Londoner.
Furthermore, politesse is not a lingual phenomenon. The politesse of a Texan is different from a New Yorker is different from a Minnesotan is very different from a Londoner.
[deleted]
Mostly replying to mail. You have to see him doing it as a full time job (and still falling behind) to understand why he tries to optimize it so much.
Probably speaking, coding, presenting, traveling, and replying to the massive amounts of email I presume he gets as leader of the Free Software movement.
He must get insane amounts of noise vs. signal in his email.
He must get insane amounts of noise vs. signal in his email.
He actually doesn't do much coding anymore. Due to his schedule he doesn't have time.
http://blog.reddit.com/2010/07/rms-ama.html (Question 10).
http://blog.reddit.com/2010/07/rms-ama.html (Question 10).
Living and enjoying life?
I guess he travels a lot (conferences etc.). Of course one could respond to emails while flying a plane, but, you know, it's rms.
Answering all these emails, apparently.
He is a fascinating creature. Sometimes I wonder what it would have been like to be alive at the same time as various historical characters. With him, I think I am. I believe history will treat him kindly, regardless of his idiosyncrasies.
Keep in mind that RMS' email policy should not be confused with his face-to-face conversational style.
I ran into him at a train station in Milan, and completely commandeered his time and attention for a good 30 minutes, despite the fact that he had a train to catch. He politely answered all of my questions, and he even responded to my criticisms with civility and respect.
If you ever get him in a casual, face-to-face conversation, you will find that he actually comes across as quite meek and restrained, rather than the arrogant blow-hard that he is generally portrayed to be.
I ran into him at a train station in Milan, and completely commandeered his time and attention for a good 30 minutes, despite the fact that he had a train to catch. He politely answered all of my questions, and he even responded to my criticisms with civility and respect.
If you ever get him in a casual, face-to-face conversation, you will find that he actually comes across as quite meek and restrained, rather than the arrogant blow-hard that he is generally portrayed to be.
It may also be that face-to-face, he realizes it's a lot easier for someone to haul off and smack a hippie than it is via the Internet.
On the other hand, I think just about everyone comes across a lot friendlier in person, merely because it's easier to portray interest and friendliness than over email.
On the other hand, I think just about everyone comes across a lot friendlier in person, merely because it's easier to portray interest and friendliness than over email.
They forgot "his ideas about software economics only make sense if you have a $1M grant from the MacArthur foundation and tenure at MIT".
His ideas seem to be scaling pretty well. The GNU ecosystem is as big as ever.
... Thanks to IBM.
Seems like you're having it both ways: Do his ideas only make economic sense because he's an academic grant recipient or because one of the largest commercial technology companies on earth has embraced the output of his work, helping foster an ecosystem around it?
There's free as in speech, free as in beer, and free as in working for IBM without getting paid.
[deleted]
His MIT position is unpaid (and I'm unclear on what exactly he does for MIT anyway), and prior to winning things like the MacArthur grant he supported himself as an independent software consultant, working on and training people to use free software.
The sign on his door at MIT says he's a "Knight of Justice (and hot ladies)."
Here's how it looked like in 2007: http://twitpic.com/2v8gwu
Has anyone else gotten unsolicited emails from RMS when you inadvertently use one of his "words to avoid" on a mailing list or the like? http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html
It's kinda fun.
It's kinda fun.
Lots of famous and busy people manage to be approachable without needing you to read a wiki page first. In fact it's really pompous to tell others they need to follow special guidelines because you're so busy, as if the rest of us sit around all day.
RMS is a bunny ears laywer (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BunnyEarsLawyer).
tvtropes is NSFWorking. Tangent: I disagree with Jack Sparrow being Crazy Awesome. He succeeds by the Rule of Cool, but I can't think of an instance where his craziness made him succeed (though that may be just because I'm very tired right now.) eg. at the start of PotC, he looks completely freaked as he flies up to escape from the pier. Or is the fact that he even tried it Crazy Awesome? Great movie, anyway.
I guess it's the new rickrolling.
He doesn't have web access? Really? I don't think I understand.
From a post from 2007[1]:
For personal reasons, I do not browse the web from my computer.
(I also have not net connection much of the time.) To look at
page I send mail to a demon which runs wget and mails the page
back to me.
It is very efficient use of my time, but it is slow in real time.
This is often quoted, but I suspect it's no longer true. When I referred him to an online article last year, he immediately replied about it. I bet he has access to a web browser when needed.
Interesting, I'd never come across that quote before today. Anyone have any idea why he doesn't like the WWW? Is he still on Gopher?
That piece of news was widely circulated back then, if I remember correctly it even spawned a few RMS == Chuck Norris posts.
In a more recent article[1], Stallman voices his opposition to web-based SaaS applications, as they take away your basic ownership of the data stored there, limiting your freedom etc.
I can understand him in this regard. I'm not that idealistic and love the convenience of some web apps, so right now that wins in the end. I think that's one of the reasons why a lot of people seem to be annoyed of RMS – we never like to be shown that we maybe compromise a bit too much. But I digress…
So you don't like webapps. You do most of your discussions in usenet or email lists (this might sound sacrilegious here, but we I don't think reddit/HN/4chan is a step up from moderated newsgroups). You can just download news, either via the above-mentioned wget trick or via RSS. That does eliminate most of your web-browsing needs, or am I missing something really important? Especially if you live in Emacs, an don't care too much about rounded corners, gradients and typographical text.
He's basically like the guy you know who tells you that he doesn't watch TV and rather reads a book. You tell him that there's quality programming and you read enough books, too, but then you remember this conversation and feel kinda guilty while watching Castle.
[1]: http://bostonreview.net/BR35.2/stallman.php
In a more recent article[1], Stallman voices his opposition to web-based SaaS applications, as they take away your basic ownership of the data stored there, limiting your freedom etc.
I can understand him in this regard. I'm not that idealistic and love the convenience of some web apps, so right now that wins in the end. I think that's one of the reasons why a lot of people seem to be annoyed of RMS – we never like to be shown that we maybe compromise a bit too much. But I digress…
So you don't like webapps. You do most of your discussions in usenet or email lists (this might sound sacrilegious here, but we I don't think reddit/HN/4chan is a step up from moderated newsgroups). You can just download news, either via the above-mentioned wget trick or via RSS. That does eliminate most of your web-browsing needs, or am I missing something really important? Especially if you live in Emacs, an don't care too much about rounded corners, gradients and typographical text.
He's basically like the guy you know who tells you that he doesn't watch TV and rather reads a book. You tell him that there's quality programming and you read enough books, too, but then you remember this conversation and feel kinda guilty while watching Castle.
[1]: http://bostonreview.net/BR35.2/stallman.php
I kindof get that. But SaaS != WWW. What's more, some SaaS supports data portability--as of yesterday, even Facebook does this! So I can't really understand the concern, at least framed this way.
The web as a timesuck is I guess a good argument, but limiting yourself to checking e-mail surely won't harness any inclination people have to read news or watch media. Right?
The web as a timesuck is I guess a good argument, but limiting yourself to checking e-mail surely won't harness any inclination people have to read news or watch media. Right?
To complete mhd's comment, at the same time (don't know if it is still how he works) he would only connect to the web once every 24h, batch fetching and sending mail (including the pages fetched by his daemon).
This meant a ~36h turnaround for his responses (average): he'd get your mail ~12h (average) after you sent it and would only (be able to) send the reply 24h after that.
This meant a ~36h turnaround for his responses (average): he'd get your mail ~12h (average) after you sent it and would only (be able to) send the reply 24h after that.
[deleted]
One of my favorite people in Microsoft is Ray Ozzie. Every single time I've mailed him, I've gotten a long, thoughtful reply. He is probably the best email handler I've seen.
BillG is pretty good at email and sending you prompt replies.