On Aug Sat 23 2003 02:13, Wolfgang Pfeiffer wrote: > On Sat, 23 Aug 2003, J. Javier Maestro wrote: > > > On Aug Fri 22 2003 22:49, Wolfgang Pfeiffer wrote: > > > On 22 Aug 2003, Michel Dänzer wrote: > > > > > > > On Fri, 2003-08-22 at 18:30, Wolfgang Pfeiffer wrote: > > > > > > > > > > So when I was writing on sometimes lousy organization > > > > > of Debian software I tried to point the finger to the > > > > > usability of the software, not to its quality: > > > > > > > > And you tried to do that by speculating that anybody contributing to > > > > Debian probably is a loser without a life? > > > > > > No. I was not talking about those contributing to Debian but on Debian > > > users: > > > > > > Quoting myself: > > > "Situations like that is why I say that Debian-Linux does not work for > > > people with a girl-friend or a family, or for folks who need to get a > > > job done on a computer in a reasonable amount of time. Or for folks > > > who simply like watching shadows on the wall (John Lennon :) or the > > > stars above them. > > > > <Karma neutral> > > Let's say the set of people with and without a girlfriend or a family > > running Debian GNU/Linux is denoted by X. > > > > Now, we all agree that if someone contributes to Debian as a debian > > developer, most surely he/she/it will be running Debian and/or any other > > distro/OS. So, after this fair assumption, we can denote Y the set of > > Debian developers and contributor. > > > > Thus, since it is clear from the above statements that Y is a subset of > > X, that is, Y is contained in X, then, by addressing X as you did, > > Wolfgang, in your previous emails, you are (I am sure not intentionally) > > addressing Y. > > > > So, yes, you were indeed talking, amongst others, about the people > > contributing to Debian. > > </Karma neutral> > > > OK, if you're really keen on a maths approach: > > Y=Debian developpers (= *coders*) > Z=Debian Users (= *non-coders*) > X=Y+Z > > Y usually knows enough on Linux so she or he does not need to "give > up" friends, family etc. to understand Debian-Linux. So if one tries > to read my posts in the context of what I was writing I still think it > could be clear that I was trying to write primarily about users, and > no one else, when I wrote about family, girl-friends and people > kissing their computer screens. > > I had hoped that people here could laugh about my picture of Debian > folks falling in love with a machine. I admit I probably was very > wrong with that hope, at least to some considerable extent.
Quoting yourself: > I'd guess it's a system for folks not knowing what to do with their > lives > if they had a working OS on their computer. > > > Is > there some hope that this situation will change on Debian? > Or do Debian folks like kissing their screens instead of their wifes or > girl-friends ... ? Can you see any smiley? No. Now, if you don't express your emotions when you write things that can be undoubtly mistaken by many people, then you shoudn't be surprised by the result. > So very clearly: if my big mouth was hurting anybody out there, I'm > definitely sorry about that. I guess you did, although as I said, my karma is quite neutral here, and I was only pointing out to you that, shady things are usually shady understood, i.e., my maths are quite different from your maths, as we have seen here. Again, smileys when making such assertions might help. > And if this helps: > > In the future you won't hear anything else than tech-talk from me > on this list: No politics. No sarcasm. No pictures. Well... then you will only become one of those "guys without a life" that you were mentionin before! :-) No need of that, just try to make clear when are you joking and when are you making serious statements. -- J. Javier Maestro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://rigel.homelinux.com
