The telling part of the GWU policy is:
This provision explicitly prohibits any behavior that is
intended to or has the effect of creating an intimidating, hostile, or
offensive environment because of an individual's sex, race,
color, religion, national origin, age, pregnancy, sexual orientation
5.12.2004 pisze William Ballard ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> On Sun, Dec 05, 2004 at 06:28:14PM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > might want, and put it on non-us since it is illegal to distribute such
> > things in the USA (and unlike the possibility of offending people's
> > sensibilities,
On Sun, 2004-12-05 at 21:42 -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> Bruce Perens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > 8. Obscenity and Harassment: GW computing systems and services may
> > not be used in an obscene, harassing or otherwise improper manner.
> > GW computing systems and services
Bruce Perens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It shows that sexual harassment in the workplace is one of their big
> concerns. And rightly so. Awards have been as large as $30
> Million. And it embarasses the institution, which creates all sorts of
> havoc by driving people and even financial donors
Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> A legal opinion on this matter would be a good idea...
Keep in mind that Debian is not the U in question; Debian has no
obligation to conform to some U's self-censorship policies.
> "Russell" == Russell Coker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Russell> As an example see some of the books of advice for
Russell> pregnant women. They have LOTS of photos of nudity
Russell> including nipples and public hair. Women seem to buy
Russell> such books in quantity.
>Fro
Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Good grief, this is one of the murkiest areas of American law, and you
think that anyone should be convinced of your FUD this way?
Would you please stop asserting that I'm out to FUD you? Given my
history I would hope that you could take for granted that I want
On Mon, 2004-12-06 at 16:55 +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 05, 2004 at 09:53:00PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> > Matthew Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > > Also, to the best my knowledge the kernel doesn't contain any pictures
> > > > of naked people either. I might
Bruce Perens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Would you please stop asserting that I'm out to FUD you? Given my
> history I would hope that you could take for granted that I want
> what's best for the project.
Sure; you want what's best, and you seem to think that what's best
right now is to make pe
On Sat, 04 Dec 2004 05:55:18 -0600, Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Personal taste? No.
> Opinion about what the law states? Yes.
Mere opinions about the law by laymen carry little weight. Do
you have any concrete evidence that actually proves (rather than
demolishes) your a
On Sun, 2004-12-05 at 22:08 -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > A legal opinion on this matter would be a good idea...
>
> Keep in mind that Debian is not the U in question; Debian has no
> obligation to conform to some U's self-censorship policies.
> "Frederik" == Frederik Schueler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> An earlier suggestion to show a lamb in various states of
>> shear, and then roasted at 100% was also good.
Frederik> As a vegeterian I have to strongly object on this. ;-)
An extra good reason not to overwork your
6.12.2004 pisze Brian May ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
[...]
> Also, to the best my knowledge the kernel doesn't contain any pictures
> of naked people either. I might be mistaken.
It is much, much worse. There is a picture of naked animal there.
Jubal
--
[ Miros/law L Baran, baran-at-knm-org-pl, neg
Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
When invited to *reduce* uncertainty and doubt, by securing a genuine
legal opinion, you said it was Not Your Job.
What I continue to object to is that there is a minority who believe
that questionable content is desirable in the distribution, but they
refuse to supp
On Mon, 2004-12-06 at 16:57 +1100, Brian May wrote:
> > "Russell" == Russell Coker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Russell> As an example see some of the books of advice for
> Russell> pregnant women. They have LOTS of photos of nudity
> Russell> including nipples and public hair.
On Sun, 5 Dec 2004 15:49:08 -0500, William Ballard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Sun, Dec 05, 2004 at 06:28:14PM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
>> might want, and put it on non-us since it is illegal to distribute
>> such things in the USA (and unlike the possibility of offending
>> p
On Sat, 04 Dec 2004 16:31:03 -0800, Bruce Perens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> David Weinehall wrote:
>> The ITP contains a link to the source for the package.
>>
>> You *really* need to have a look at the pictures. All of your
>> argumentation below about pron neatly goes *wooosh*.
>>
> I'll ta
On Sun, 5 Dec 2004 18:28:14 -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]> said:
> On Sun, 05 Dec 2004, Nick Sillik wrote:
>> On Sun, 2004-12-05 at 16:22 +0100, Paul Plop wrote:
>> > A flower may not be a good idea. For many specialists, a flower
>> > is a phallic representation. I could
On Mon, 2004-12-06 at 06:46 +0100, Miros/law Baran wrote:
> 5.12.2004 pisze William Ballard ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
>
> > On Sun, Dec 05, 2004 at 06:28:14PM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
[snip]
>
> The interesting part is, how easily some of us resort to the plain, old
> censorship in th
On Sun, Dec 05, 2004 at 09:38:51PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Anibal Monsalve Salazar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > For one, the Australian laws prohibite any web site in Australia to host
> > pornographic material.
> >
> > See http://www.efa.org.au/Issues/Censor
Ron Johnson wrote:
That's true. Debian doesn't *have* to be mirrored *anywhere*.
I have not so far seen what you are going to tell the mirror operators
so that they know what packages to reject. Surely you can not believe
that they are all responsible to dig this information up on their own.
On Mon, 2004-12-06 at 17:02 +1100, Brian May wrote:
> > "Frederik" == Frederik Schueler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> An earlier suggestion to show a lamb in various states of
> >> shear, and then roasted at 100% was also good.
>
> Frederik> As a vegeterian I have to strongly
On Sun, Dec 05, 2004 at 09:13:29PM -0600, Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> No. "We" are not calling on the Morality Police to take the
> particular web site down. "We" are not saying, "you can not
> install that app on your computer".
>
> There's a *fundamental* difference between "don't
On Mon, 2004-12-06 at 07:03 +0100, Miros/law Baran wrote:
> 6.12.2004 pisze Brian May ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
>
> [...]
>
> > Also, to the best my knowledge the kernel doesn't contain any pictures
> > of naked people either. I might be mistaken.
>
> It is much, much worse. There is a picture of nak
Bruce Perens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> What I continue to object to is that there is a minority who believe
> that questionable content is desirable in the distribution, but they
> refuse to support themselves by doing the legal homework to support
> the content they desire. The entire project
Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> That's true. Debian doesn't *have* to be mirrored *anywhere*.
We do well to listen to what mirrors say, and what their concerns
are. But we do not do well to guess at what they might say, on the
basis of half-understood and unsupported claims about what
On Sun, 2004-12-05 at 22:33 -0800, Bruce Perens wrote:
> Ron Johnson wrote:
>
> >That's true. Debian doesn't *have* to be mirrored *anywhere*.
> >
> >
> I have not so far seen what you are going to tell the mirror operators
> so that they know what packages to reject. Surely you can not believ
Bruce Perens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have not so far seen what you are going to tell the mirror operators
> so that they know what packages to reject. Surely you can not believe
> that they are all responsible to dig this information up on their
> own. That would be very unsympathetic towa
On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 22:32:29 -0600, Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Sun, 2004-12-05 at 19:24 -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>> Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > There's a *fundamental* difference between "don't want hot-babe
>> > in Debian" and "don't want hot-babe to
On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 20:50:25 -0600, Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Sun, 2004-12-05 at 15:07 +, Andrew Suffield wrote:
>> On Sun, Dec 05, 2004 at 08:45:56AM -0600, Steve Greenland wrote:
>> > On 05-Dec-04, 04:55 (CST), James Foster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > There's
On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 21:37:41 -0800, Bruce Perens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> 1. (*) text/plain ( ) text/html
> Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>>> It strikes me that some of the material in question would be in
>>> violation of the Internet policies of most institutions or
>>> companies that host ou
On Mon, 06 Dec 2004 16:35:41 +1100, Brian May <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>> "Tollef" == Tollef Fog Heen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Tollef> | Finally, I would like to commend Michelle Konzack for
Tollef> standing up on | this issue. Debian should never promote |
Tollef> degradation/abuse/explo
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Seems like if the person being offended has the sole
> discretion about what is offensive, trhewn hell, we might as well
> hang up our keyboards and go home, cause anyone can be offended by
> anything.
Don't worry, that's not how hostile en
On Mon, 2004-12-06 at 15:36 +0900, Mike Hommey wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 05, 2004 at 09:13:29PM -0600, Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > No. "We" are not calling on the Morality Police to take the
> > particular web site down. "We" are not saying, "you can not
> > install that app on your
On Mon, 2004-12-06 at 00:27 -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Sun, 5 Dec 2004 15:49:08 -0500, William Ballard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> > On Sun, Dec 05, 2004 at 06:28:14PM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> >> might want, and put it on non-us since it is illegal to distribute
> >>
Title: Abwesenheitsnotiz: Mail Delivery (failure [EMAIL PROTECTED])
Sehr geehrter EMail-Partner, sehr geehrte EMail-Partnerin,
in der Zeit vom 29.11.04 - 03.12.04 bin ich nicht im Hause, und habe auch keinen Zugriff auf mein EMails.
Ihre EMails werden NICHT weitergeleitet.
Bitte wenden Sie
On Mon, 06 Dec 2004, Ron Johnson wrote:
> On Mon, 2004-12-06 at 07:03 +0100, Miros/law Baran wrote:
> > 6.12.2004 pisze Brian May ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > > Also, to the best my knowledge the kernel doesn't contain any pictures
> > > of naked people either. I might be mistaken.
> >
> > It is much,
On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 19:36:13 -0800, Bruce Perens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>> Maybe we should have such a process; maybe not. But regardless,
>> the current process allows each individual developer that judgment.
>>
>>
> All Debian process is a result of having a p
On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 17:27:39 -0800, Bruce Perens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Steve Greenland wrote:
>> Okay everybody, repeat after me: Choosing not to distribute a given
>> package is NOT censorship. We are not telling people that they
>> can't install, use, and/or distribute the package, just t
On Sun, 5 Dec 2004 12:21:04 -0600, Steve Greenland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On 05-Dec-04, 09:07 (CST), Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Sun, Dec 05, 2004 at 08:45:56AM -0600, Steve Greenland wrote:
>> > On 05-Dec-04, 04:55 (CST), James Foster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > >
On Sun, 5 Dec 2004 14:23:52 +0100, Jonas Meurer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On 05/12/2004 James Foster wrote:
>> Pornography may be offensive to some. Is the package description
>> for hot-babe accurate? Are people who do not want it installed
>> being forced to install it?
>>
>> People who may
On Mon, 2004-12-06 at 00:31 -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 21:37:41 -0800, Bruce Perens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
[snip]
> Seems like if the person being offended has the sole
> discretion about what is offensive, trhewn hell, we might as well
> hang up our keyboards
On Sun, 2004-12-05 at 22:49 -0800, Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Mon, 06 Dec 2004, Ron Johnson wrote:
> > On Mon, 2004-12-06 at 07:03 +0100, Miros/law Baran wrote:
> > > 6.12.2004 pisze Brian May ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > > > Also, to the best my knowledge the kernel doesn't contain any pictures
> > > >
On Sun, 5 Dec 2004 15:55:27 +, Matthew Garrett
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Hmm. Let it not be said that I don't respond in a fashion that
the responded is likely to understand.
> Or, putting it another way: failing to include this piece of code
> does Debian no demonstrable harm. Inc
On Sun, 5 Dec 2004 22:57:19 +0100, Jan Ingvoldstad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Here's one useful suggestion, I think:
> If hot-babe is useful as a .deb, make it available as such through
> its own web site or something. This works for many other packages
> not accepted into the Debian tree for
On Sun, 2004-12-05 at 22:44 -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Seems like if the person being offended has the sole
> > discretion about what is offensive, trhewn hell, we might as well
> > hang up our keyboards and go home, cause anyone ca
On Mon, 2004-12-06 at 00:39 -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 22:32:29 -0600, Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> > On Sun, 2004-12-05 at 19:24 -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> >> Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >>
> >> > There's a *fundamental* difference b
On Mon, 2004-12-06 at 00:57 -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Sun, 5 Dec 2004 22:57:19 +0100, Jan Ingvoldstad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> > Here's one useful suggestion, I think:
>
> > If hot-babe is useful as a .deb, make it available as such through
> > its own web site or something. This
On Mon, 06 Dec 2004 00:48:47 -0600, Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Mon, 2004-12-06 at 00:27 -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> On Sun, 5 Dec 2004 15:49:08 -0500, William Ballard
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>>
>> > On Sun, Dec 05, 2004 at 06:28:14PM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 22:26:08 -0800, Bruce Perens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>> When invited to *reduce* uncertainty and doubt, by securing a
>> genuine legal opinion, you said it was Not Your Job.
>>
>>
> What I continue to object to is that there is a minority who b
Hi fellow developers,
I failed in ending this thread when I posted
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2004/12/msg00016.html
instead I caused two trolls making even more noise.
I hope all you people are aware that you are causing a new duelling banjo
case and helping out Google to connect De
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sun, Dec 05, 2004 at 10:07:59PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> Bruce Perens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > It shows that sexual harassment in the workplace is one of their big
> > concerns. And rightly so. Awards have been as large as $30
>
On Mon, 2004-12-06 at 00:38 -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 20:50:25 -0600, Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> > On Sun, 2004-12-05 at 15:07 +, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> >> On Sun, Dec 05, 2004 at 08:45:56AM -0600, Steve Greenland wrote:
> >> > On 05-Dec-04, 04:55 (
On Mon, Dec 06, 2004 at 12:26:17AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Umm, only if it is indeed deemed to be illegal. So far, there
> has been just FUD about this issue. I am not sure that artistic work
> qualifies as porn, which seems to be the case here.
Artistic or no
On Sun, Dec 05, 2004 at 10:17:29PM -0800, Bruce Perens wrote:
> Would you please stop asserting that I'm out to FUD you? Given my
> history I would hope that you could take for granted that I want what's
> best for the project.
I love how Debian has no sacred cows. It's one of the reasons I
stu
Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Don't worry, that's not how hostile environment harassment law works.
> > IIRC, it's based on a reasonable person test, and is extremely
> > complex.
>
> It all depends on your definition of "reasonable".
No, that's not true. "reasonable person" (ac
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, Dec 06, 2004 at 12:24:19AM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
> On Sun, 2004-12-05 at 22:08 -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> > Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > A legal opinion on this matter would be a good idea...
> >
> > Keep in
On Mon, 06 Dec 2004 00:45:20 -0600, Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Mon, 2004-12-06 at 15:36 +0900, Mike Hommey wrote:
>> On Sun, Dec 05, 2004 at 09:13:29PM -0600, Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>> > No. "We" are not calling on the Morality Police to take the
>> > particul
On Mon, 06 Dec 2004 01:08:31 -0600, Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Mon, 2004-12-06 at 00:57 -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> On Sun, 5 Dec 2004 22:57:19 +0100, Jan Ingvoldstad
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>>
>> > Here's one useful suggestion, I think:
>>
>> > If hot-babe is useful
On Mon, 06 Dec 2004 01:07:32 -0600, Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Mon, 2004-12-06 at 00:39 -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 22:32:29 -0600, Ron Johnson
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>>
>> > On Sun, 2004-12-05 at 19:24 -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>> >> Ron J
On Mon, 2004-12-06 at 01:06 -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Mon, 06 Dec 2004 00:48:47 -0600, Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> > On Mon, 2004-12-06 at 00:27 -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> >> On Sun, 5 Dec 2004 15:49:08 -0500, William Ballard
> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> >>
> >>
On Sun, 2004-12-05 at 23:18 -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > > Don't worry, that's not how hostile environment harassment law works.
> > > IIRC, it's based on a reasonable person test, and is extremely
> > > complex.
> >
> > It all depends on your
On Mon, Dec 06, 2004 at 01:11:10AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Seems more like there is a more of a minority of uber right
> wingers trying to batten down art that offends their sensibility. The
> actual project members seem to be more or less taking the sensible
>
On Mon, 2004-12-06 at 02:04 -0500, Kevin Mark wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Mon, Dec 06, 2004 at 12:24:19AM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
> > On Sun, 2004-12-05 at 22:08 -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> > > Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > >
> > > > A l
Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > No, that's not true. "reasonable person" (actually, they say
> > "reasonable man") is a quite well-defined concept in American law.
>
> Is "reasonable man" the same in San Francisco and Birmingham, AL?
Um, workplace harrasment cases are not the same a
On Mon, 2004-12-06 at 01:18 -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Mon, 06 Dec 2004 01:08:31 -0600, Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> > On Mon, 2004-12-06 at 00:57 -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> >> On Sun, 5 Dec 2004 22:57:19 +0100, Jan Ingvoldstad
> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> >>
> >>
On Fri, 3 Dec 2004 13:49:44 +1100, Matthew Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>>
>> The advantage of using glastree over pdumpfs is that it is
>> implemented in Perl rather than Ruby (this is in fact the reason
>> that I encountered it in the first place).
> How is that an advantage of use?
On Mon, Dec 06, 2004 at 08:12:50AM +0100, Andreas Tille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Hi fellow developers,
>
> I failed in ending this thread when I posted
>
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2004/12/msg00016.html
>
> instead I caused two trolls making even more noise.
>
> I hope al
Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
But it seems that now you're telling me that you know better than the
mirror operators which packages will violate their internal policies.
Certainly a good guess is better than nothing. Upon such a list it
would be possible to err on the side of caution and al
Ron Johnson wrote:
Legal, illegal, what's the difference? *I* want to package it.
Therefore, anyone who tries to stop me is censoring me.
Nobody can stop you from creating a package of it. Folks on the Debian
project can collectively decide whether or not the project should be a
party to dist
On Sun, Dec 05, 2004 at 11:42:15PM -0800, Bruce Perens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>
> >But it seems that now you're telling me that you know better than the
> >mirror operators which packages will violate their internal policies.
> >
> >
> Certainly a good guess is b
Bruce Perens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Nobody can stop you from creating a package of it. Folks on the Debian
> project can collectively decide whether or not the project should be a
> party to distributing it.
Currently the only procedure we have in place for this, short of
convincing the ma
On Sun, 2004-12-05 at 23:44 -0800, Bruce Perens wrote:
> Ron Johnson wrote:
>
> >Legal, illegal, what's the difference? *I* want to package it.
> >Therefore, anyone who tries to stop me is censoring me.
> >
> >
> Nobody can stop you from creating a package of it. Folks on the Debian
> project
Bruce Perens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>
> >But it seems that now you're telling me that you know better than the
> >mirror operators which packages will violate their internal policies.
> Certainly a good guess is better than nothing. Upon such a list it
> would b
On Friday 03 December 2004 16:19, Kevin Mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> 2) can not be sexist
Bad idea. We should avoid subjective criteria.
> 3) has to be able to be mirrored by all mirrors based on the laws of the
> location of the server
Bad idea. Some countries have stupid laws and we sh
On Sun, 2004-12-05 at 23:29 -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > > No, that's not true. "reasonable person" (actually, they say
> > > "reasonable man") is a quite well-defined concept in American law.
> >
> > Is "reasonable man" the same in San Franci
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Who's we here, kemo sabe? Last I looked, you are not a project member.
You haven't looked in a while.
Bruce
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Russell Coker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> How about you go off and create a distribution that panders to all the silly
> ideas. The rest of us will keep making Debian usable.
Um, I think Kevin Mark was making exactly this point.
Unfortunately, people try sarcasm all the time, and it falls fl
On Sunday 05 December 2004 20.11, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Any parser that acceps 8bit non-ascii chars
> will accept UTF-8 then. What remains is just making the UTF-8 chars
> visually correct then.
And make sure that, where character strings are modified, the multibyte
sequences are counted
Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Currently the only procedure we have in place for this, short of
convincing the maintainer to withdraw it, is a GR.
Yes, I will work on that.
And, IIRC, you aren't one of those folks anyway, right?
No, that's wrong. I was added to the active Debian developer keyring
m
This is not a policy proposal yet, when I have that I will bring it to
debian-project.
The entire Debian Social Contract is driven by a desire for social
justice. But when I proposed it I only wrote about software. During the
whole month that we discussed and refined the thing, I don't remembe
On Monday 06 December 2004 08:01, Ron Johnson wrote:
> On Sun, 2004-12-05 at 22:49 -0800, Don Armstrong wrote:
> Umm, all animals (except humans) are naked.
:-O and here I always thought I was naked underneed my clothes!
--
Cheers, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis)
1. Encrypted mail preferred (GPG Ke
Bruce Perens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This is not a policy proposal yet, when I have that I will bring it to
> debian-project.
It is *still* off-topic for this list. Discussion about possible
policy proposals, the whole damn thing, belongs on debian-project.
Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> > Nobody can stop you from creating a package of it. Folks on the Debian
> > project can collectively decide whether or not the project should be a
> > party to distributing it.
>
> Currently the only procedure we have in place for this, short of
> convincing the mainta
On 2004-12-06, Brian May <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If the intention is to be silly, why not replace the images with
> something else that isn't so controversial? I personally liked the
> idea I heard about the sheep. Just change the name at the same time.
Yeah. hot-sheep is surely less controv
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, Dec 06, 2004 at 06:51:23PM +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
> On Friday 03 December 2004 16:19, Kevin Mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > 2) can not be sexist
>
> Bad idea. We should avoid subjective criteria.
>
> > 3) has to be able to be mir
Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Well, except for..
I'm sorry, I didn't mean that these other possibilities don't exist.
Bruce was not suggesting any of them either, and my real point is that
none of them are on-topic for debian-devel.
> 6. project decides informally that potential legal
On Mon, Dec 06, 2004 at 01:24:32AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Dec 2004 13:49:44 +1100, Matthew Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> >>
> >> The advantage of using glastree over pdumpfs is that it is
> >> implemented in Perl rather than Ruby (this is in fact the reason
> >> that I en
On Mon, Dec 06, 2004 at 02:16:58AM -0500, William Ballard wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 05, 2004 at 10:17:29PM -0800, Bruce Perens wrote:
> > Would you please stop asserting that I'm out to FUD you? Given my
> > history I would hope that you could take for granted that I want what's
> > best for the proje
On Sun, Dec 05, 2004 at 10:38:51PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > That's true. Debian doesn't *have* to be mirrored *anywhere*.
>
> We do well to listen to what mirrors say, and what their concerns
> are. But we do not do well to guess at what
Go away and don't come back until you have read the mailing list code
of conduct. I do not need a second copy of this entire sodding thread.
On Sun, Dec 05, 2004 at 09:01:48PM -0800, Bruce Perens wrote:
> Is Debian a legal entity? The answer is unquestionably yes.
Where do you get these ideas? De
* Thomas Folz-Donahue ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [041206 04:00]:
> Where is Anthony Wong?
> [...]
> debian-developers, now I turn to you. Where is Anthony Wong, and how
> can I get this feature-restoring patch in the hotkeys package?
Please see
http://www.debian.org/doc/developers-reference/ch-beyond-p
On Sun, Dec 05, 2004 at 09:06:00PM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
> > > > What is actually happening here is that one individual Debian
> > > > developer is choosing to distribute a given package, and some other
> > > > developers are trying to stop them. That's censorship. Even if they
> > > > don't ha
On Sun, Dec 05, 2004 at 09:39:42PM -0500, Thomas Folz-Donahue wrote:
> Where is Anthony Wong?
Please see http://bugs.debian.org/280817 -- it's in need of a new
maintainer.
--Jeroen
--
Jeroen van Wolffelaar
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (also for Jabber & MSN; ICQ: 33944357)
http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl
On Monday 06 Dec 2004 06:54, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Stupidly enough, you have committed the idiotic mistake of
> assuming that everyone holds to your premises, that firstly,
> tolerating intolerance is somehow a good thing -- why should it be is
> beyond me.
Oh, this is about intolerance i
On Mon, Dec 06, 2004 at 01:24:49PM +1100, Ben Burton wrote:
>
> > > shrug. At least in .au we have some legislation to protect minority
> > > groups but we're not living in a totalitarian PC clampdown.
> >
> > Sounds irrelevant. There's a big difference between 'protect minority
> > groups' (fro
On Monday 06 Dec 2004 10:01, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> The difference being that editing is a choice made by the person doing
> the work, while censorship is a choice made by an otherwise unrelated
> person in the same organisation.
>
> Editing would be if the maintainer decided to remove the
> pac
Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
On Sun, Dec 05, 2004 at 09:39:42PM -0500, Thomas Folz-Donahue wrote:
Where is Anthony Wong?
Please see http://bugs.debian.org/280817 -- it's in need of a new
maintainer.
Since I use hotkeys every day and did some work on it before the woody
release I will take the pac
On Sun, Dec 05, 2004 at 10:01:15PM -0800, Bruce Perens wrote:
> The U. would err on the side of caution given the potential danger. If
> the "Hot Babe" package was being distributed from their facilities,
> they'd pull the plug. In order to appear to be proactive regarding
> harassing, offensive
On Mon, Dec 06, 2004 at 04:34:54PM +1100, Anibal Monsalve Salazar wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 05, 2004 at 09:06:23PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> >Bruce Perens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> >>It strikes me that some of the material in question would be in
> >>violation of the Internet policies
1 - 100 of 153 matches
Mail list logo
