On Mon, 29 Dec 2008 17:45:56 +0100, Romain Beauxis wrote: > Freedom of speech is a constitutional disposition, and I don't think it is > something that could be acheive. It really is a constitutional act. > > It is also why I am against the Code of Conduct. Freedom of speech is an > utopism that I support for Debian, and a Code of Conduct, or whatever you > call it, is a way to shut those who do abid to the politically-correctness > way of expressing oneself.
TTBOMK there's no unrestricted Freedom of Speech in any constitution. The constitutional Freedom of Speech does not cover what someone is allowed to do in my living room, does not allow to shout aloud at 4 a.m. in front of my sleeping room and makes libellous public statements prosecutable. (And I'm ignoring here more local restrictions like political campaigning on election days or denial of the Holocaust etc.) If Debian adopts a CoC (which probably is nothing more than writing down patterns of obvious behaviour among civilized grown-ups) that would not be an infringement of Freedom of Speech -- it would just set rules for specific fora and it would not hinder anyone from expressing there thoughts in their preferred way in other media. I also agree with Russ' statement that guarantees about Freedom of Speech (and against censorship) "only constrain[s] the actions of the *government*". Or more bluntly: Debian simply cannot censor anyone, and an inflationary use of "censorship" just blurs and weakens this term. On a more personal note: I still don't understand why the expressed wish of several people "please treat your fellows with respect" can cause such a stir. Cheers, gregor -- .''`. Home: http://info.comodo.priv.at/{,blog/} / GPG Key ID: 0x00F3CFE4 : :' : Debian GNU/Linux user, admin, & developer - http://www.debian.org/ `. `' Member of VIBE!AT, SPI Inc., fellow of FSFE | http://got.to/quote/ `- NP: Tina Turner: The Best
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
