[FireBeyond]

> I've seen him not being super nice to other people who were trying to have a conversation with him, not because he's not a nice person (I found him quite personable one on one), but it seems to me that he struggles to know how to behave around people who don't know how to just talk to him about things he wants to talk about.

I'd argue that while he may be nice, it's also generally considered impolite to be someone who "only talks to him about the things he wants to talk about". It's meant to be a two-way street, generally. Someone who only wants to talk about what -they- are interested in, not what their conversation partner is interested in is not being nice or polite.

[tomnipotent]

You don't owe random strangers your time, and it's so strange to me that people feel so entitled to other peoples time. Can also be argued that it's rude to engage a person on a topic they're not interested in.

[FireBeyond]

I do, to an extent, agree. But I also think it's impolite to have relationships where "we're going to talk about what I want to talk about, but when we go to talk about what you want to talk about I'm just going to pick up my laptop and ignore you or tell you I don't want to".

You could argue, in your description, the same about RMS - he might feel entitled to someone's time to talk about free software.

[tomnipotent]

There is no relationship if you're never going to see these people again. My time is my most precious resource, and I'm not obligated to give it away because someone thinks their initiation of a conversation needs to be reciprocated.

RMS set boundaries and that's perfectly reasonable.

[wussboy]

…