Your article states a long list of criticisms against me, and I doubt
that they are valid.
In particular, I am sure the story about Sofia must be garbled. I
would not even _think_ that someone was an idiot because she asked me
a question I could not answer. So I don't believe I said that.
I can only guess what did happen. Perhaps she asked a question that
made no sense, and I said so. Perhaps when she heard "That question
makes no sense", she understood it as a personal attack, although it
wasn't one. This is a kind of misinterpretation that people often
make. With this kind of misinterpretation, she might have believed
incorrectly that I had called her an idiot.
I can't say this is what happened, but it is at least plausible.
Various other kinds of misunderstanding are plausible too. However,
it is unlikely it happened as she told you. I sometimes utter harsh
rebukes, but they are generally about something important.
That might seem like a surprising claim. After all, isn't it well
known that I have zero social skills, and insult people for no reason?
That is the impression your article gives.
Many people tell stories where I do that; if you collect them and
present their side as undisputed fact, I sound like a real jerk.
Thus, anyone who gets into a dispute with me finds it easy to say,
"Stallman was gratuitously nasty again," and a segment of the public
will nod in sympathy. Therefore, such stories tend to accumulate.
One point in the collection is that I have been "uninvited" from
conferences. I think I can guess one conference I won't be invited
back to: CISL in Argentina. After what I said there about the
Condenar a Maldad program, which distributes dual-boot computers in
which GNU+Linux (see http://www.gnu.org/gnu/gnu-linux-faq.html) is
present but many classes require students to run Windows, they
probably won't invite me again.
My criticism at CISL was necessary, given how much of the organized
free software movement in Argentina had drifted into praising and
supporting that program. I stand by what I said. But if you want to
criticize me a few years from now, you could accurately say I was
"uninvited from a conference" with CISL in mind. Without giving
details, included in a list of many other such criticisms, it will sure
make me sound bad.
What about the rest of the list? I'm not perfect, so maybe some of
them were my mistakes. However, you shouldn't suppose I'm at fault
just because someone criticizes me.
Your article states a long list of criticisms against me, and I doubt that they are valid.
In particular, I am sure the story about Sofia must be garbled. I would not even _think_ that someone was an idiot because she asked me a question I could not answer. So I don't believe I said that.
I can only guess what did happen. Perhaps she asked a question that made no sense, and I said so. Perhaps when she heard "That question makes no sense", she understood it as a personal attack, although it wasn't one. This is a kind of misinterpretation that people often make. With this kind of misinterpretation, she might have believed incorrectly that I had called her an idiot.
I can't say this is what happened, but it is at least plausible. Various other kinds of misunderstanding are plausible too. However, it is unlikely it happened as she told you. I sometimes utter harsh rebukes, but they are generally about something important.
That might seem like a surprising claim. After all, isn't it well known that I have zero social skills, and insult people for no reason? That is the impression your article gives.
Many people tell stories where I do that; if you collect them and present their side as undisputed fact, I sound like a real jerk. Thus, anyone who gets into a dispute with me finds it easy to say, "Stallman was gratuitously nasty again," and a segment of the public will nod in sympathy. Therefore, such stories tend to accumulate.
One point in the collection is that I have been "uninvited" from conferences. I think I can guess one conference I won't be invited back to: CISL in Argentina. After what I said there about the Condenar a Maldad program, which distributes dual-boot computers in which GNU+Linux (see http://www.gnu.org/gnu/gnu-linux-faq.html) is present but many classes require students to run Windows, they probably won't invite me again.
My criticism at CISL was necessary, given how much of the organized free software movement in Argentina had drifted into praising and supporting that program. I stand by what I said. But if you want to criticize me a few years from now, you could accurately say I was "uninvited from a conference" with CISL in mind. Without giving details, included in a list of many other such criticisms, it will sure make me sound bad.
What about the rest of the list? I'm not perfect, so maybe some of them were my mistakes. However, you shouldn't suppose I'm at fault just because someone criticizes me.