Are you guys actually arguing that CatB was better sourced than this article? It wasn't. It was just one relatively unknown guy's impression of what he thought made free software work, with a similarly self-congratulatory tone.
If you thought fame went to ESR's head, you're wrong; he was always like that.
Yes, I am arguing that it was a good article and did a good job of describing what was going on. ESR certainly has his flaws, but that paper really was a well-done summary of how this stuff works and why, much better than anything else that was out there at the time (I remember reading it in 1998, I think it was).
I don't think he's done much since then that was worth writing home about, but that doesn't take anything away from that particular accomplishment.
Ok, I went back and reread some of that essay and I have to withdraw some of my criticisms. You are right and I was wrong.
CatB, although anecdotal, is trying to make a coherent case from evidence, and the author's ego is kept relatively in check. His later writings became more like opinion pieces, and are constantly self-referential. My irritation with those must have carried over to the original.
