Re: OT: Re: debian-women obscurity, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Once again, your complaint is about a topic restriction, not a > > restriction on who is allowed to address that topic. > > Cool, so declaring all discussions and collaboration involving > women "off-topic" fo

Re: Red-tops, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Yes, it's the message about my first point, where Martin Schulze > told me that in-project communication was never a goal of DWN. > This exchange illustrates my fifth point: you do not know how > DWN actually works and I don't think you can find out reliably.

Re: OT: Re: debian-women obscurity, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

On Sun, Mar 06, 2005 at 12:55:49AM +, MJ Ray wrote: > Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > A page about people that only admits contributions from women. > > What's the URL, please? > > http://women.alioth.debian.org/profiles/ I have a pa

Re: OT: MJ Ray's obscurity [was: debian-women obscurity]

On Sun, Mar 06, 2005 at 02:19:48AM +, MJ Ray wrote: > Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Once again, your complaint is about a topic restriction, not a > > restriction on who is allowed to address that topic. > > Cool, so declaring all discussions and collaboration involving >

Re: debian-women obscurity, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

MJ Ray wrote: >Erinn Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> * MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005:03:04 14:07 +]:=20 >> > If debian-women are so good at communicating, why don't I see it?=20 >> Because you refuse to subscribe to our list or read DWN for ideological >> reasons. > >I think you'll find

Re: Red-tops, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > But one example *cannot* demonstrate your point. [...] I was referring to DWN being one example of communication in debian. > Nor, for that matter, does a Message-ID prove anything. You can't say > or remember what's in that message, can you? Y

Re: OT: Re: debian-women obscurity, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Once again, your complaint is about a topic restriction, not a > restriction on who is allowed to address that topic. Cool, so declaring all discussions and collaboration involving women "off-topic" for debian-www would be fine with you? -- To UN

Re: debian-women obscurity, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If you want to prove there is something nefarious going on, you must > *give the evidence*. The burden of proof is on you. I know. I'll prove it to people who will actually fix it. It will not help to publish more info here and will harm helpful p

Re: OT: Re: debian-women obscurity, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

Ean Schuessler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Is it possible to just chill out on the chicks? [...] It's just an example of some general problems (and not one I raised). > Would you have a problem with blind Debianers creating such a list? Nazis or > terrorists sure, but ladies!?! [...] For at le

Re: debian-women obscurity, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > All mail on the debian-women list is public. Not all of their > > > work is archived in public and they explicitly prohibit IRC logs, > > > probably both for good root r

Re: Red-tops, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > If you cannot substantiate them publicly, then they are nothing more > > than pissing in the wind. > > Get Message-Id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > that was sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] if it matters that much to you.

Re: OT: Re: debian-women obscurity, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > A page about people that only admits contributions from women. > > What's the URL, please? > > http://women.alioth.debian.org/profiles/ I believe anyone can *contribut

Re: OT: Re: debian-women obscurity, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

Is it possible to just chill out on the chicks? Can't the girls brave enough to wade into our computerized backwater have a little something of their own without all this trouble? The very few women in Debian put up a page that lists those women and men aren't listed on it because it is a list

Re: debian-women obscurity, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > All mail on the debian-women list is public. Not all of their > > work is archived in public and they explicitly prohibit IRC logs, > > probably both for good root reasons IMO. > What is "they"? debian-women co

Re: OT: Re: debian-women obscurity, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > A page about people that only admits contributions from women. > What's the URL, please? http://women.alioth.debian.org/profiles/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe"

Re: Red-tops, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If you cannot substantiate them publicly, then they are nothing more > than pissing in the wind. Get Message-Id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> that was sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] if it matters that much to you. I don't have a copy here and I've not checked my

Re: Red-tops, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

Henning Makholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Scripsit MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Interesting, but missing any measure of whether I'm being > > kissed or kicked. > If we are talking about the same publication, then neither. For all > the time I have read DWN, its stories have consisted of neutra

Re: Questions to candidates: what is source?

Hi, Am Samstag, den 05.03.2005, 23:11 + schrieb Andrew Suffield: > On Sat, Mar 05, 2005 at 03:30:14PM +, Henning Makholm wrote: > > Indeed, I would be reluctant to vote for any candiate who would commit > > to twenty-four definite answers as part of his campaign, no matter > > what the ans

Re: Questions to candidates: what is source?

On Sat, Mar 05, 2005 at 03:30:14PM +, Henning Makholm wrote: > Indeed, I would be reluctant to vote for any candiate who would commit > to twenty-four definite answers as part of his campaign, no matter > what the answers were. Or, for that matter, one who couldn't spot the fairly big hole in

Re: Questions to candidates: what is source?

Ha! This gets the official "best question so far" award. Especially the neural network bit. That's rich. On Saturday 05 March 2005 7:49 am, Seo Sanghyeon wrote: > 6. Which of the following satisfies DFSG #2? What is the general >principle? Or should it be case-by-case? > > * ELF binary witho

Re: Exclusion, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 12:48:50AM +, MJ Ray wrote: > Is that 65% for the d-i in the next release, or d-i current? That > still leaves a third excluded and d-i is *much* better than most, far > more widely translated more than most of debian. There's a lot of > other things to improve too.

Re: Clarification about krooger's platform

Marcelo E. Magallon wrote: On Wed, Mar 02, 2005 at 10:10:45PM -0500, Erinn Clark wrote: > None of the individuals [...] Can we _please_ stop refering to people by their nicknames, IRC handles or whatever it is that you are using? It's bad enough to try and remember a couple hundred names, don'

Re: Clarification about krooger's platform

On Wed, Mar 02, 2005 at 10:10:45PM -0500, Erinn Clark wrote: > None of the individuals [...] Can we _please_ stop refering to people by their nicknames, IRC handles or whatever it is that you are using? It's bad enough to try and remember a couple hundred names, don't make it worse by adding

Re: ftpmasters' job and the DPL

On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 12:33:25PM -0800, Anthony Towns wrote: > Frank Küster wrote: > >Do you think that the uncertainty about the criteria for accepting or > >rejecting a new package can make developers to hang on to badly designed > >old solutions, instead of proposing and implementing/packaging

Re: OT: Re: debian-women obscurity, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > What is a "women-only" web page? > > A page about people that only admits contributions from women. What's the URL, please? > > Where is the list charter for debian-women "women-only"? > > Being about or by

Re: debian-women obscurity, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > All mail on the debian-women list is public. Not all of their > work is archived in public and they explicitly prohibit IRC logs, > probably both for good root reasons IMO. What is "they"? Not all my work on gnucash is archived in public. Developers are free

Re: Red-tops, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Maybe. Call it revenge if you want, but please consider whether > > > there's truth behind them or how one can tell. > > Your accusations are, as far as I can tell, enti

Re: Question for candidate Towns [Was, Re: DPL election IRC Debate - Call for questions]

Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > So what ? You are one of us, and not a potentially hostile outside agency. PUBLIC. That means not only to "us", but to hostile things too. Hostile things like the US Government, or *really* hostile things like the governments of France and China. -- T

Is NEW processing on hold? (was: Question for candidate Towns)

Hamish Moffatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > There's rumours on debian-devel that NEW processing is actual on hold > (by decision rather than by default) but that wasn't communicated. Of > course it may be false It is false. http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-changes/2005/03/msg00019.html

Re: ftpmasters' job and the DPL

Anthony Towns wrote: > I think most people in Debian are community minded enough to > find it difficult to work if they don't feel that the project -- as > represented by the DPL, by delegates, by fellow developers, by users, > whatever -- supports their activities. I think the problems posed by

Re: Questions to candidates: what is source?

Scripsit Seo Sanghyeon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > 6. Which of the following satisfies DFSG #2? What is the general >principle? Or should it be case-by-case? [snip TWENTY-FOUR semi-concrete examples] However relevant and interesting it would be to get the candidates' general opinion about the DFSG

Re: communication obscurity [was: debian-women obscurity]

> > > [...] Can't blame > > > people for not seeing cool stuff if it's stuck away in an > > > obscure backwater mostly unannounced. > > Where was there blame? [...] > > After krooger wondered about adequate transparency, there was > http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2005/03/msg00032.html Well:

Re: Red-tops, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

Scripsit MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Interesting, but missing any measure of whether I'm being > kissed or kicked. If we are talking about the same publication, then neither. For all the time I have read DWN, its stories have consisted of neutral references to threads on the mailing lists, with

Questions to candidates: what is source?

The Debian Free Software Guidelines states that "The program must include source code". 1. How do you define "source code" yourself? 2. I think that people have different ideas of what "source code" means. Do you agree? Are there significant disagreements regarding this issue within the Debi

Re: Red-tops, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

On Sat, Mar 05, 2005 at 01:28:43PM +, MJ Ray wrote: > Henning Makholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The list shows everybody who has more than 1000 points. You are not > > among them (except if my DWN-parsing script is broken), but MJ himself > > currently has 2661 points and a ranking of #30.

Re: Red-tops, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

Henning Makholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The list shows everybody who has more than 1000 points. You are not > among them (except if my DWN-parsing script is broken), but MJ himself > currently has 2661 points and a ranking of #30. Interesting, but missing any measure of whether I'm being kiss

Re: communication obscurity [was: debian-women obscurity]

Matthew Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, Mar 05, 2005 at 02:25:49AM +, MJ Ray wrote: > > Like those are the only two options, the two extremes. It > When you're trying to solve the problem of "ensure that someone you may not > know exists gets your announcements", that is basically i

Re: Exclusion, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Notice that there is already an effort on this subject going on in > debian-esperanto, and you would have known about it if you had been subscribed > to this list, i guess you are more than welcome to join that effort. Notice that I am a (minor) part in tha

Re: Question for candidate Towns [Was, Re: DPL election IRC Debate - Call for questions]

On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 12:18:37PM -0800, Anthony Towns wrote: > Matthew Garrett wrote: > >3) My package has been sitting in the queue for ages and other packages > >have been processed > >This is a communication problem. > > No, this is a policy problem. Communication is easy: hit "M" for manual

Re: Red-tops, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

Scripsit Joel Aelwyn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Oooh! So the fact that I've shown up in it a few times means I'm part of > the Cabal now? No, not by a large margin. I have a cabalometric experiment at . The rules: Each time DWN links to

Re: debian-women obscurity, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Sadly not directly. The public stuff is too vague and > > limited to the level of "Who cares?" about someone linking > > krooger's message to him being a white christian male. > All the debian-women mail is publ

Re: OT: Re: debian-women obscurity, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > What is a "women-only" web page? A page about people that only admits contributions from women. > Where is the list charter for debian-women "women-only"? Being about or by women are the only topicality criteria for debian-women, last I saw. --

Re: Red-tops, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Maybe. Call it revenge if you want, but please consider whether > > there's truth behind them or how one can tell. > Your accusations are, as far as I can tell, entirely false. Can you tell? I know at least one

Re: Exclusion, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 12:48:26PM +, MJ Ray wrote: > Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Nope, it doesn't work that way. The translators come to the d-i and > > translation team and ask what they can do to help get it translated. > > I think this is tied up with the change of installer

NEW processing and crypto notification (was: Re: Question for candidate Towns)

On Saturday 05 March 2005 10:59, Sven Luther wrote: > On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 01:55:25PM -0800, Anthony Towns wrote: > > Sven Luther wrote: > > >I have some real trouble with the fact that all the work i do for debian > > > is reported to the US secret services or whatever by the ftp-masters > > >

Re: Question for candidate Towns [Was, Re: DPL election IRC Debate - Call for questions]

On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 01:55:25PM -0800, Anthony Towns wrote: > Sven Luther wrote: > >I have some real trouble with the fact that all the work i do for debian is > >reported to the US secret services or whatever by the ftp-masters and our > >archive handling services, and i certainly did *NOT* agr

Re: Question for candidate Towns [Was, Re: DPL election IRC Debate - Call for questions]

On Sat, Mar 05, 2005 at 09:02:36AM +0100, Andreas Barth wrote: > * Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050305 09:00]: > > On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 01:59:16PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > > > Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > I have some real trouble with the fact that all the wo

Re: Question for candidate Towns [Was, Re: DPL election IRC Debate - Call for questions]

Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Yep, but there is a difference between the information being > available, and it being actively feeded to the NSA or whoever. And > it is especially bothering if this cause undue delay in our normal > activities, like aj is saying it is. Tough. It's *pub

Re: Question for candidate Towns [Was, Re: DPL election IRC Debate - Call for questions]

On Sat, Mar 05, 2005 at 08:48:21AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote: > On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 01:59:16PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > > Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > I have some real trouble with the fact that all the work i do for debian > > > is > > > reported to the US secr

Re: Question for candidate Towns [Was, Re: DPL election IRC Debate - Call for questions]

* Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050305 09:00]: > On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 01:59:16PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > > Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > I have some real trouble with the fact that all the work i do for debian > > > is > > > reported to the US secret services or