On 06/01/16 05:19, Chris Knadle wrote: > Daniel Pocock: >> >> >> On 31/12/15 04:22, Steve Langasek wrote: >>> On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 02:03:40PM -0800, benjamin barber wrote: >>>> It's unfortunate that Debian is named after Debra and Ian, >>>> because having the project named after a white supremacist, who >>>> used his ex-wifes name as an trophy. >>> >>> I agree in whole with the responses of my fellow developers Dimitri >>> and Russ. I also believe, because the Internet never forgets, that >>> this libelous accusation needs to be addressed directly. >>> >>> In the time leading up to Ian's death, he posted on his now-deleted >>> twitter account about an altercation with police. He described >>> being the victim of police brutality, and expressed the desire that >>> his story be widely known - in the hopes that, where stories of >>> police brutality (up to and including murder) of racial minorities >>> in the United States have failed to lead to the systemic reforms >>> that are needed, perhaps a story of a white, affluent, educated, >>> middle-aged man being a victim of the same systems might tip the >>> scale. >>> >>> In the course of expressing these views on twitter, Ian used a >>> racial epithet. >>> >> >> In fact, it has not been verified that those Tweets were from Ian >> himself. It can only be said that there were Tweets and they appear >> to originate from Ian's Twitter ID. >> >> Had somebody hacked his account? > > I believe the Tweets that have been posted are really from Ian. The basis > of my belief is a story at The Register which quotes the facts as stated by > the San Francisco Police Department in the last few paragraphs: > > http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/12/30/ian_murdock_debian_founder/
There is a general consensus not to keep picking through the details on the mailing list. I only posted those questions about the matter to emphasize the lack of information - none of the material anybody has provided can answer those questions conclusively with hard evidence so there is nowhere for this thread to go. Please don't feel I am encouraging people to seek out answers, I only posted the questions to highlight the lack of facts in the original troll mail, we just have to sit back and wait and see if they are answered from a credible source. The PR statements are not a credible source, only an official report from an inquiry has any weight. PR statements are not made under oath like evidence in court or an affidavit.
