Xref: utzoo gnu.g++.help:595 comp.lang.c++:12184
Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!uunet!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!unreplyable!garbage
From: rms@MOLE.AI.MIT.EDU (Richard Stallman)
Newsgroups: gnu.g++.help,comp.lang.c++
Subject: please don't use Motif
Message-ID: <9103122248.AA21640@mole.ai.mit.edu>
Date: 12 Mar 91 22:48:13 GMT
Sender: daemon@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu
Followup-To: gnu.g++.help
Organization: Gatewayed from the GNU Project mailing list help-g++@prep.ai.mit.edu
Lines: 29


    Rather, if anything, Stallman should post notes pointing out that it
    is to *Stallman's* advantage if authors of public domain software were
    to publish their software under Stallman's licensing restrictions.

Ordinarily I would not refer to a denunciation as sloppy as this one.
(Those who have better memories than I have might even recall that my
previous message was about a choice of X toolkits, and not about what
terms people might use for the software they write.)

However, it does provide a good example of a mistaken notion that is
commonly offered by those who wish to criticize the GNU project.  This
mistake is to equate the success of free software with personal
benefit for me.  As if I were making purely selfish requests of people
when I urge them to write free software.

It's true that I get a feeling of satisfaction out of seeing free
software spread.  However, if free software provided satisfaction only
to me, no one would pay attention to it, and I would stop doing it.
GNU software is important because it satisfies a large number of
people.  Chances are that most of you (being readers of a GNU mailing
list) are among them.

I would not expect very many people to follow my recommendations
purely as a way of making me happy.  However, a number of people seem
to appreciate having free software available.  Other people appreciate
using GNU software.  These people, for their own reasons, might be
interested in the recommendations I make for what will help to promote
free software.