Like most people here, I think this thread has long ago served whatever usefulness it will have. I'm not interested in continuing it.
I'll just respond to some direct questions, but don't take any lack of response on particular points as agreement. Rurpy via Python-list <python-list@python.org> writes: > Rereading your post, I agree, you did not say anything at all about > the old-people-cant-learn stereotype. > > So I apologize for saying you were ok with that. Thank you, apology accepted. > So at this point, you made a single attempt to claim there was no > stereotyping based on national origin, a claim I refuted here [*1] and > perhaps more clearly here [*2] neither of which there was a reply to. And now we've both stated our cases, and others can judge the merits. This particular debate isn't one I'm interested in pursuing further. > And you explicitly acknowledge effectively a "no comment" response > regarding an offensive a stereotype based on age? Is that a fair > statement? No. Simply not responding at all, since the charge was not even addressed to me. I am not obliged to address every point of every post, and the absence of comment on any particular point is not generally to be read as full assent. We have to focus our responses, or they become even more lengthy and unreadable than has already shown to be the case. That necessarily means not responding to every point, even at the cost of omitting an objection we might like to make. > "if you are going to have a CoC, it must be applied even-handedly." I agree entirely with that. -- \ “If the arguments in favor of atheism upset you, explain why | `\ they’re wrong. If you can’t do that, that’s your problem.” | _o__) —Amanda Marcotte, 2015-02-13 | Ben Finney -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
