COMMENT ⊗   VALID 00004 PAGES
C REC  PAGE   DESCRIPTION
C00001 00001
C00002 00002	∂21-Jun-83  2326	RPG  	RMS 
C00003 00003	∂21-Jun-83  2341	JMC  	rms 
C00004 00004	∂21-Jun-83  2358	FAHLMAN@CMU-CS-C 	RMS    
C00006 ENDMK
C⊗;
∂21-Jun-83  2326	RPG  	RMS 
To:   fahlman@CMU-CS-C
CC:   "#COMMON.MSG[COM,LSP]"@SU-AI
Given his `tilt-at-windmills' attitude about many things, we must not
get hung up on bringing him to Common Lisp. Even if he stated today he would
support it, he would throw the sources open to anyone and everyone to change
as they pleased. He would tinker and fiddle with it no end. Our hope with MIT
is for the administrative levels to recognize folly when they see it.

His role is gadfly and irritant. 

			-rpg-

∂21-Jun-83  2341	JMC  	rms 
While I suspect your characterization is correct, messages such as yours
should not be part of the Common Lisp discussion file.  In the heat of
a controversy such remarks may be reasonable, but remember that they'll
still be in the file a year hence.  I would suggest that you edit it
out.

Well, you may not have noticed that that message was cc'ed to the file,
not sent to the list. I've re-mailed many private messages to the file
as a record. Perhaps, you're suggesting, I should do a global fork?
			-rpg-
∂21-Jun-83  2358	FAHLMAN@CMU-CS-C 	RMS    
Received: from CMU-CS-C by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 21 Jun 83  23:57:36 PDT
Received: ID <FAHLMAN@CMU-CS-C>; 22 Jun 83 02:56:47 EDT
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 1983  02:56 EDT
From: Scott E. Fahlman <Fahlman@CMU-CS-C>
To:   Dick Gabriel <RPG@SU-AI>
Subject: RMS 
In-reply-to: Msg of 21 Jun 83  2326 PDT from Dick Gabriel <RPG at SU-AI>


As my recent mail showed, I'm not hung up on on keeping RMS aboard.  I
just wanted him to know that we'd still like him aboard if he wants to
come.  I share your belief that he would not, of his own accord, conform
to any standard -- some of his stunts with the MIT mailers prove that --
but it may be that he will be responsive to his users.

As you say, in the long run it's irrelevant.  He can't keep up with
Symbolics indefinitely, single handed.  Sooner or later, LMI will go
under and Stallman's users at MIT will switch systems, but that's his
problem, not ours.

Well, back to real work...

-- Scott