https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edito r_war

>>59392636

i hate wikipedia its fucking closed source masquerading as open source and free

nuke it already

>>59392636
>Notably, unlike other wars (ie, UNIX vs ITS vs VMS, C vs Pascal vs Fortran), the editor war has yet to be resolved with a clear winner
I didn't know we acknowledged Fortran had won yet.

They're both shit. The end.

>>59392748
Word brutha

I still have my punch card sheets.

>>59392636
I'd just like to interject for a moment. You appear to be using an element from this image in your post: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Richard_Stallman_-_Preliminares_2013.jpg
You may have done this accidentally, but you've violated the terms of its copyright license. This is a serious offense and I hope you take it as seriously as it deserves.
Not to say that you're not allowed to create derived works from this image, you are, but this picture is released under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.0 Generic license. Therefor, you are free:

to share - to copy, distribute and transmit the work;
to remix - to adapt the work;

Under the following conditions:

attribution - You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work).
share alike - If you alter, transform, or build upon this work, you may distribute the resulting work only under the same or similar license to this one.

In this case, the attribution requirement is resolved simply by including the following in your post:

Preliminares 2013 [CC BY-SA 2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

Now that you have read this, I hope you have a better understanding of your rights and obligations when remixing and sharing this work. They will let you edit, now be nice and credit~