Who got the arguing to stop?

  I didn't ask for a link to my Stallman piece to be posted on Hacker News. But it was linked to anyway. And the idiots over there (not all of them, but they dominate) repeated all the bullshit that the bullshitters used to say about me that I was talking about in the piece. Kind of ironic and totally predictable. Some of them were even the original bullshit artists. Spouting their well-rehearsed BS. Amazing lack of self-awareness. :-)
  I just want to say the stuff they say about me is bullshit. They should be asked to substantiate their accusations, but it never happens. I'm not going to get into arguments with them. I'm just going to say that if you asked them to back up their vitriol with some actual citations they would be hard-pressed. These people are as competent at arguing tech as the idiots on cable news are at arguing politics (which is to say there's no substance, just optics and perceptions).
  But I want to say what I always say about RSS being invented. It wasn't invented. There was a constant adoption and refinement of ideas that were out there, some came from others and others came from (sorry guys but it's true) me. And the arguing didn't stop until we got the NY Times on board. Because what matters is not who invented a simple low-tech format, which RSS certainly is, what matters is who got the arguing to stop. And for that I look to the NY Times. So if you want to blame someone for making your arguments irrelevant, that's who you need to talk to, not me.
  Of course the Times has no clue that they made RSS work. They support it as if they had nothing to do with its adoption. And that is such an elegant statement about the power of people working together instead of pissing on each other.