On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 21:55:48 -0600, Timothy R. Butler wrote: > >> Similar to what another poster said, the day Debian starts censoring is the >> day I stop advocating Debian as a distro. > > I question whether it is censorship to remove and/or seperate racist >material from acceptable things. If someone started to include X-rated >pictures in Debian, does that mean you would argue their right to do so >because Debian shouldn't censor?
What it means is that in the free marketplace you choose not to use that application. Or, choose to use it as is OR remove the offending pictures. You have the power. > > There is a difference between basic QA and censorship, IMO. On the one hand >Quality Assurance/Control can filter out stuff that is pure trash and of >absolutely no value. On the other hand, censorship would be filtering out >something that may be of value but someone deems they don't want. What value >does this so-called "joke" provide? If you read the maintainer's comment on this, you would know that he used a file he got off the net and was not aware of all the content. With the bug filing, he has removed the offending file. Again that is the market in action, without your damned censorship. > > IMO, people are too worried about censorship when they admit they find >something very offensive, but still think it shold be included in a Software >Package. Can you see the field day MS would have if they could download a few >Debian packages and say "See? All this Linux nuts are a bunch of racists!" >Would it be true? No. Would it appear that way to non-Linux users? Quite >possibly. Not even an issue. Only an excuse for less freedom of choice. -- gt Yes I fear I am living beyond my mental means--Nash
