----- Original Message -----
From: "Angus Leeming" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <lyx-users@lists.lyx.org>
Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 3:55 PM
Subject: Re: OT: tetex RPMs (was: Re: Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs
Stephen P. Harris wrote:
Peter Flynn is an arrogant, ignorant blowhard. I think my expression
of dissatisfaction was rather moderate. I think your moral intervention
was a day late and a dollar short and not directed at the instigator.
My apologies. I hadn't realised I was expected to read all your mails as
they arrived.
You are not when you act as a contributor to the mailing list. However,
Angus wrote: > Stephen, cool it please.
That statement is easily seen as one of moral censure. Moderators who
make such statements are obligated to read the entire thread.
Non-moderators can also express their opinions and they are free to do so,
no matter how ignorant they are of the circumstances. Certainly reminds me
of Peter Flynn.
You are a fairly adept developer. Your ethical values leave a lot to
be desired, IMO, as I mentioned before when I asked you not to
bother me before. You are far from a moral authority. If you have a
right to post your annoyance to what I wrote, I feel much more
justified to complain about Peter Flynn's provocative posts.
Maybe you don't care about my ethical values. That puts you in a
perfect position to understand why I don't care about yours. As
a wannabe moderator, I view you as a flunking "kludge"{PF}.
I don't see what your opinions about my moral character have to do with
just about anything. This mailing list has never needed a moderator. I'd
rather hope that that would continue.
Stephen, cool it please.
SH: That means you think I have said something inappropriate.
I doubt if you are delusional enough to suppose that your opinions
are facts. So your opinion is a value judgment relating to _your_
moral or ethical standards. A moderator is a person who has the
authority to impose their ethical standards/opinions. You do not
hold my respect as an ethical arbiter. I would have to respect your
opinion, have some regard for your moral/ethical stature in order
to think your opinion of what is inappropriate ("cool it) is something
which I should pay heed to. You would need to be mature IMO, not
someone who wears there feelings on their cuff.
Perhaps I have been too subtle. Your moral character which is composed
of your values and standards served as the basis for your censorial remark.
Censorial remarks are rightfully made by moderators. Non-moderators
can also make such remarks. Your statement is no different than mine in
that it expressed displeasure... again IMO, the person who has the most
information is the most qualified to make a determination about what is
appropriate. I can't help it if you don't agree. Nor can I help it if you
think my statements are inflammatory, rather than accurate, and that
Flynn's statements are innocuous. You didn't respond to the issue, IMO.
Truly, I feel somewhat surprised to be the subject of your vitriol. If
England hadn't just regained the Ashes in a heroic and titanic struggle
against the Aussies, your post might even make me feel a little upset.
Does that sport have the situation where the referee blows the whistle
on the second foul? I see that as 'enabling', defending the real culprit,
and I'm strongly opposed to it because it makes my world a worse place.
I think the solution to Peter's problem is found in the TeX Live 2000
userguide, not attributable to the evil RH tetex.rpm developers who Peter
suggests are perhaps deliberately sabotaging the Tex Live releases.
I've thought this over before posting. I think most likely you are not
aware of why I don't like Peter Flynn's type of person, or even know
that he is that type of person. I did think previously, that you were
writing from a more informed point of view, which was based upon
circumstantial evidence, although, since you obvioulsy don't support
certain Australian Apartheid policies, I am not sure of my supposition
regarding the depth of your cunning.
Tally Ho,
Stephen
