Hacker News Reader

I'm not sure that it makes sense to compare RMS to (say) suicide bombers. Not all "fanaticism" is equivalent.

I'm pretty sure that you can be a fanatic without being a suicide bomber, and that he didn't imply "RMS is like a suicide bomber".

I am prepared to acknowledge that he might well be right in his positions on freedom, but he comes across as a lunatic in most of his talks. I have a problem with this; if what he's saying is important, could we not advance a more charismatic, tactful and effective ambassador?

Or get rid of your expectations on what an ideal leader is?

Either way we already have a community of people sharing similar values of open source - I don't think we need a hierarchical leader/follower structure.

The OP called him a fanatic not a suicide bomber. Just because some fanatics make themselves into bombs doesn't mean it's the definition.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com