"Chris G. Demetriou" writes:
> "It was me" only in as much as I was willing and had the desire to
> exercise my rights.

Sure, but there is a fundamental problem here.

There is "what is legal" and there is "what is right". Virtually
everyone has to learn the distinction at some point. What you did
might have been legal, but was it "right" to harrass poor Bill for
operating a CTM server, which he was running merely to try to provide
a service to people without the ability to sup sources? Was stopping
people from getting CTM access going to make the NetBSD project better
off, or was it just going to make people unhappy? I doubt it was
causing you any significant harm.

Sure, you had the "right" to do this and everything else you did. Did
it make you friends? Did it make your life better? Did it reduce
everyone's stress?

In the end, we have to look beyond tit-for-tat and similar
stuff. People occassionally have to kick back and ask not merely what
they *can* do, but what they *should* do.

Frankly, Chris, I think it would be a real shame if this whole series
of mindlessly bad incidents caused a bunch of people who really should
be friends to stop working together. And here we have another "right"
vs. "should" situation. You have a perfect "right" to decide to spend
the rest of your life pissed off at everyone in Core over the license
issue, and they have a "right" to be pissed off at you, and everyone
involved has the "right" to be maximally mutually destructive until
the end of time. Is that really what is going to maximize everyone's
happyness, though?

Why don't we all just accept that there was a difference of opinion, a
bunch of unfortunate behavior, and some unpleasant incidents, and just
move on with our lives? We can dwell on all this forever, and it won't
do anyone a lick of good.

Perry