I think I’m justified in saying that someone is clueless about communication if that person honestly believes that a statement by a very public spokesperson in any public place – no matter how obscure – will or should remain obscure.

That’s not how communication works. Sorry.

I thought that was sort of implied by my comment, no need to explicitly say it, because it’s so damn obvious. But I’m sorry if you though that my comment was nothing but an attack.

I understood what you meant, I just found it ironic in the extreme that you chose to complain about poor communication by genuinely using poor communication, especially given the context of the thread.

You've been commenting that Stallman should have deported himself better, and yet you break out with a comment like that yourself.

My argument doesn’t require me to lead by example. I’m some random commenter.

And since you understood me perfectly well there doesn’t seem to be a problem in this specific case.

Understanding you perfectly well isn't the issue at point, it's the manner of how you present yourself - witness all the crap in this thread about RMS from those people who now accept that he didn't wish Jobs dead, but still say he should have been more polite about it. You don't have much of a credible leg to stand on if you don't engage in that which you request of others.

Edit: changed 'moral' to 'credible' to avoid semantic bickering about the loaded word.

Morals? I think I have been talking squarely about effective communication, not morals.