>>" I contacted Stallman to discuss it, and he suggested I work on an Adobe Acrobat clone. I also learned some shocking things about him, and decided I didn't want to be involved with an organization led by such a man. "
>>OK, I'm curious, what shocking things?
>
>From 2003: "The nominee is quoted as saying that if the choice of a sexual partner were protected by the Constitution, "prostitution, adultery, necrophilia, bestiality, possession of child pornography, and even incest and pedophilia" also would be. He is probably mistaken, legally--but that is unfortunate. All of these acts should be legal as long as no one is coerced. They are illegal only because of prejudice and narrowmindedness.
>
>"Some rules might be called for when these acts directly affect other people's interests. For incest, contraception could be mandatory to avoid risk of inbreeding. For prostitution, a license should be required to ensure prostitutes get regular medical check-ups, and they should have training and support in insisting on use of condoms. This will be an advance in public health, compared with the situation today.
>
>"For necrophilia, it might be necessary to ask the next of kin for permission if the decedent's will did not authorize it. Necrophilia would be my second choice for what should be done with my corpse, the first being scientific or medical use. Once my dead body is no longer of any use to me, it may as well be of some use to someone. Besides, I often enjoy rhinophytonecrophilia (nasal sex with dead plants)."
>
>Affirmed in 2014: "This "extreme pornography" law needs to be repealed, not just reformed. Various kinds of animals, including cats, dogs, gorillas, and dolphins, sometimes enjoy and even ask for sexual activities with humans. To prohibit the act, or images of it, is sheer authoritarian prudery. Necrophilia can't hurt the person who died (nothing can), so there is no reason to prohibit the act, let alone images of it."
>
>I also contacted him personally to confirm his beliefs on these issues back in April, 2012. This led to a weeks-long email exchange, and ultimately my decision to reject everything related to GNU as far as giving it my developer support. I then created the Liberty Software Foundation (libsf.org) as a God-fearing alternative to such an ungodly entity as the Free Software Foundation. My goal was to provide similar software as GNU, but to do it in a way which honors God. That's why my applications have crosses on them, etc. (see image of Visual FreePro, Jr.'s developer environment).
>
>>I can't recall if I had heard his name before. I looked him up. Guy needs a haircut, that's for sure.
>
>He created GNU back in the 1980s. He's quite the genius visionary, but he's mentally disturbed. There's a great video showing how Linux and GNU rose to compete with Microsoft and Windows from the early 2000s called Revolution OS. There are other copies of that movie on YouTube some with better quality.

I had some interaction with the guy many years ago..... 'disturbed' is putting it meekly. It doesn't take long to figure out either.