On Sun, Jan 24, 1999 at 11:43:33PM -0500, Avery Pennarun wrote: [ interesting solution to exercise 1, which I'm not quoting to avoid rule (2), but I have to comply with anyway because I want this message to make its way to debian-devel, or debian-humour if it existed ]
According to rule (0) you have to comply with (1), (2) and (3). From the text of rule (3), which I won't quote because of the previously expressed reasons, it seems as if it will always hold because the messages have to make it somehow to the lists and (3) doesn't say which DN has to be a FQDN so it applies to each and every one of them. Because of rule (3), (2) applies, but that was already the case according to (0). Since the text of (2) doesn't invalidate (6) but just says (8) also applies but (6) is no longer a requierement, it doesn't conflict with (3) which says (6) a requierement. Having cleared that problem, (2) applies because Marcus quoted Raul and David. (3) applies because of the reasons exposed in the previous paragraph. Taking that into account, (4), (6), (8) and (42) apply. (1) applies because Marcus assumed Raul was serious about the need for a nice long legal document indicating what's appropriate traffic for the debian-grumpy-party-poopers list. (5) and (7) apply because of this. It is not clear whether or not Marcus was trying to make someone happy (5) with that message, but one could argue he was making Raul happy because he was fulfilling the request for a nice long legal document indicating what's appropiate traffic for the debian-grumpy-party-poopers list. The number of letters (2111) divided by the number of words (328) in the message is roughly 6.4; the number of colums over the number of lines is 1.7, so this goes against (7) (I'd like to understand what this rule tries to address -- force short messages or force the use of short words?) I can produce a signature like Marcus' with figlet, so that's ok with (8) but I don't think Marcus' signature summarizes his position. (9) doesn't apply. (42) is not a rule. IMO the message doesn't comply with the rules it defines.
