Since forums deal with people, how is it possible to put sociology, psychology and ethics aside as if the present time were a time from several decades ago? Society as a whole, has moved on to the extent, that minorities are given a voice that can easily be felt and heard both in the media and legally. How is the Devuan Distribution going to ethically justify its decision of letting abuse, whatever form that may take, to take place on its infrastructure?
Every person should enjoy equal rights, but reading some of the preceding argumentation, gives the ethically questionable message that some people have lesser rights than others. I am using 'lesser rights' to signify the implied message that people with disabilities or with a weak personality are better to stay off public forums. This is discrimination which is hard to ethically justify. Disabled persons, both physically and mentally, should enjoy the same rights. However, without moderation this cannot be achieved. They are simply shooed off like annoying insects that land on a dinner table in the wrong time. Whatever some may say, the world as a whole, is moving towards a better place to live in with more social acceptance and legal rights. Supporting the notion of a forum that is like the 'wild wild west' flies in the face of that reality bringing back ghosts from the past of rejection and intolerance. As I am a Devuan user who has contributed with my own time to the project, I expect the project to adopt policies that respect minorities wholly, irrespective of their characteristics. Other than that, it is a pain to see policy adaptions that contradict what is today so widely accepted as a basic right. -- If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough. (Albert Einstein) If you cannot make abstructions about details you do not understand the concepts underlying them. _______________________________________________ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
