27;ve already talked to CC and they agreed to fix their licenses; 3.0
and later should be fine, when they're released (2.x never will be).
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
small solutions.
like EMACS. or dvt.
well, dvt was _supposed_ to be simple
it only took 2 weeks to write
Manoj: It requires a *diagram* to explain what each part does.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `'
, or the DPL, or K people whose keys are in the
> >> keyring, AND
>
> > What is K?
>
> 1. Go to <http://www.debian.org/devel/constitution>.
> 2. Search for "K is".
And http://www.debian.org/vote/2005/vote_001 where the value of K for
this vote is
On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 07:49:29AM +, Henning Makholm wrote:
> Scripsit Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > I believe it was once tried somewhere in Europe as a method for
> > running a country, where it was a spectacular failure, but I really
> &
a serious measure of
activity.
On the other hand, I note that a couple of them are in my killfile.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Tue, Mar 08, 2005 at 11:38:56PM +, MJ Ray wrote:
> Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 08, 2005 at 03:31:49PM +, MJ Ray wrote:
> > > [...] I hope that the link was there originally and
> > > has just been lost because of
e it
was a spectacular failure, but I really don't remember any
details.
The normal result of systems based on this concept is to minimise
disagreement within groups while maximising disagreement between
groups, causing widespread fragmentation and eventual
collapse. Organisation by cliques
ked so far, and seems
fairly unlikely to ever work. Usual case of somebody overestimating my
interest in what they're saying :P
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
y you could hold a GR to order someone to shut up (or to shut them
> up) but they would have to be pretty amazingly rude at that point.
I'm not sure you can even do that.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffi
e
very least.
[0] Henry IV, Part 1, Act 3, Scene 1. Go look it up.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
nnected from the DFSG, or a new
rule, or anything like that, is one created and trumpeted by the
anti-freedom advocates. It's fiction.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
er their political agenda (usually based around some
notion of how other people should be forced to think), rather than
actually do anything about the problems. Most meta-arguments on this
subject revolve around such lunacy than any real problems (making them
quite irrelevant).
--
.''`.
mained as politically neutral as it always has.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Sun, Mar 06, 2005 at 01:10:27PM -0500, Clint Adams wrote:
> ===BEGIN ALLEGORY===
> I spend the next several hours sending Andrew Suffield chain letters
> that say "if you don't fix tla by Thursday, your liver will transform
> into mascarpone." I send these emails w
ecause nobody is being
exploited.
(False dilemma, but admittedly it's the false dilemma posited by the
US government to excuse their efforts to control the market)
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `'
slavery.
That's two candidates for the bottom of the pile...
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
what was the accepted meaning of the DFSG.
Since all objections have been dismissed, obviously there was
"consensus", with the exception of the thing currently being
dismissed.
It's a fairly conventional circular argument; most people on -legal
have stopped paying
On Sun, Mar 06, 2005 at 12:44:44AM +0100, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> 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 comm
ly big hole in the
questions and just blindly answered them.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
histerical.
Regardless of original intent, DWN *is* currently the Debian tabloid
press. The quality, responsibility, and accuracy of reporting are all
very familiar.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `'
ntrinsically a good thing.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
DWN misreporting the more insane discussions on
debian-legal as if they were Debian policy, rather than an idiot being
shot down, slashdot reprinting the misreport, and then people using
this as an effort to sabotage -legal.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | And
bottom and see how that works out? I'm sure you'll find plenty
> of willing volunteers.
We are the space robots. We are here to protect you from the terrible
secret of space.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
ars to be the year for total failure to
comprehend how the process works, I would like to take this
opportunity to nominate 14 kilos of mature cheddar cheese, the entire
population of Swaziland, and a dead camel, as a single candidate for
Debian Project Leader.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux **
ing eyes and horns.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Sat, Feb 19, 2005 at 12:34:34PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > > Do you have an argument for either?
> >
> > Points that stand unchallenged do not require arguments. To do so
> > would be a wa
On Sat, Feb 19, 2005 at 11:48:50AM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I didn't even put them in that order, why on earth would anybody think
> > that one follows from the other? That's a semicolon, not a col
On Sat, Feb 19, 2005 at 10:49:05AM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Sat, Feb 19, 2005 at 02:04:48AM -0600, Ean Schuessler wrote:
> > > Truly, there is no justice.
> >
> > Of course not, don't be
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Wed, Jul 28, 2004 at 11:05:19PM +0200, Roland Mas wrote:
> Andrew Suffield, 2004-07-28 22:20:09 +0200 :
>
> > "None of these other things worked, so this one must"? That's not
> > actually rational...
>
> Ever heard of the Shadoks? [1] They had thi
e must"? That's not
actually rational...
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Wed, Jul 28, 2004 at 09:48:24PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Andrew Suffield ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040728 20:25]:
> > On Wed, Jul 28, 2004 at 07:00:29PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
> > > ===
> &
On Wed, Jul 28, 2004 at 08:51:14PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 28, 2004 at 07:16:04PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> >
> > You cannot write a GR to order somebody to do something. That's
> > fundamental to the project structure, and written into the
>
ody to do something. That's
fundamental to the project structure, and written into the
constitution. Get used to the idea, and stop proposing GRs that don't
do anything.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
eby
discourage participation?
The stuff before "hereby resolves" should be deleted anyway, and
instead posted to a mailing list as normal prose.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
re almost useless. The only particularly good reason for
using them is when the constitution says that we have no other choice
(like editing the blasted foundation documents).
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `'
any further.
The best part about this clause is that it's a complete no-op. It's
also a vote for more money.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
ct, it's just a lack of activity.
>
> In fact, the constitution specifically allows for people to simply not
> act and there is no way, other than an amendment to the Social Contract,
> to force a group into activity.
I think you need to modify the constitution
On Fri, Jun 25, 2004 at 05:58:45PM +1000, Russell Coker wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Jun 2004 14:13, Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 25, 2004 at 12:57:08AM +0200, David N. Welton wrote:
> > > I don't know what it is about your style of
> > >
On Fri, Jun 25, 2004 at 03:15:22PM +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 25, 2004 at 05:42:04AM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > That's just so totally American.
>
> Now there's the ad hominem attack you keep referring to.
No, that would be "You are Americ
On Thu, Jun 24, 2004 at 02:35:59PM +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 22, 2004 at 07:45:53PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > I find it to be more like fishing for consensus, by trying as many
> > possibilities as possible (hence "buckshot"). It really could hav
On Thu, Jun 24, 2004 at 02:08:26PM +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 24, 2004 at 02:13:39AM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > Well, this thread has certainly proven Manoj right, at least in part:
> > there exists a group of developers who not only refuse to try to build
>
ng lists).
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
ng to the discussion, and who is simply deciding "Is
this post on my side? If yes, AOL, if no, flame".
It is interesting that this does not occur on most lists. I think we
have a troll infestation.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :&
"How to vote
in a Condorcet system"; it gets *really* old. You sort the options
according to precise personal pairwise preferences; everything else is
either equivalent to this, or will backfire)
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.d
On Tue, Jun 22, 2004 at 11:58:31AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Andrew Suffield:
>
> >> The discussion about fonts, closed and semi-closed data formats, and
> >> data formats which are inherently lossy and for which we lack the
> >> lossless source files has
imply pointing this
out as a substitute for the standard response. Furthermore you are
expected to explain the fallacy if somebody involved does not
understand it.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Sun, Jun 20, 2004 at 10:29:01PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Andrew Suffield:
>
> > Ah yes, that's another of those common memes. It's completely
> > unfounded. There is no reason to think that it would take a long time
> > to evict all the offending mat
ee software is what matters.
>
> Option 6 is the position that our users don't matter, and it's not
> important to release.
I already covered this one in my first mail, but anyway: this is based
on the assumption that our users are best served by non-free
softw
ather than removing some of the options from the ballot.
> So, leave it at that, and don't pretend to offer voting
> advice when all you really do is advocate your own position. If you want
> to advocate your own position, that's fine, there's nothing wrong with
> that; bu
ely
unfounded. There is no reason to think that it would take a long time
to evict all the offending material - it's trivial in most cases.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`-
d
> usability of Debian releases are to be achieved by removing stuff that
> was not supposed to be removed just a while ago.
Only if you take it as a given that the old release policy was
correct. Otherwise it's just that heads have been forcibly removed
from the sand now.
--
, especially if we foist
non-free software on them for two or three years until the next
release.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
ut sooner, does not sound like a good idea to me.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
;t go out
of your way to avoid saying what you mean; this is dumb.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Tue, Jun 01, 2004 at 10:19:15AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> For our users, we promise to do regular releases; as a guideline, a
> major release of the distribution should happen about once a year.
"We vote for more money"
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | And
t would engender acceptance of a license which
is antithetical to both.
With this in mind, the contradiction inherant in this resolution can
only be interpreted as equivalent to "The DFSG is hereby rendered
impotent for all practical purposes; anything can be included in main
if we feel like it&qu
On Tue, May 25, 2004 at 09:38:12PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Wed, May 05, 2004 at 01:06:39PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > I propose the following amendment, replacing the entire text of the
> > resolution:
> >
> > The Debian project resolves that it wil
On Tue, May 25, 2004 at 03:47:46AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Mon, May 24, 2004 at 03:57:19PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > > > I believe Anthony Towns has said that he now believes his earlier release
> > > > policy to be in error.
> > > No. It wa
at you
sow.
I think this should have been a GR from the very start, and I said so
at the time.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
the release manager. I think that
responding to a result you didn't like with anything that reduces to
"Oh, they didn't really *mean* that" rather speaks for itself.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `'
the DFSG.
---
This amendment essentially reaffirms that the current text of the
social contract is what is meant, and that Debian does not cut corners
in order to release sooner.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
the DFSG.
---
This amendment essentially reaffirms that the current text of the
social contract is what is meant, and that Debian does not cut corners
in order to release sooner.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
can't recall the last time I wanted to do anything
interesting with that logo, and I have more important things to
do. Somebody who cares about it should chase it up and get it fixed.
I'm not really convinced that the "official logo" has a good excuse
for existing.
--
.'
can't recall the last time I wanted to do anything
interesting with that logo, and I have more important things to
do. Somebody who cares about it should chase it up and get it fixed.
I'm not really convinced that the "official logo" has a good excuse
for existing.
--
.'
easonable to pass the
> > change without them.
>
> Not to this extreme, I think.
We had that vote too (disambiguation of 4.1.5), and decided differently.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
hem need agree.
> That is less than 4% of our developer community.
That's a mischaracterisation. You also need *all* the other developers
to be absent or apathetic. If that were the case then there's a great
deal of dead weight, and it would indeed be reasonable
easonable to pass the
> > change without them.
>
> Not to this extreme, I think.
We had that vote too (disambiguation of 4.1.5), and decided differently.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
ree.
> That is less than 4% of our developer community.
That's a mischaracterisation. You also need *all* the other developers
to be absent or apathetic. If that were the case then there's a great
deal of dead weight, and it would indeed be reasonable to pa
sues.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
sues.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
o arguments based on "more intuitive".
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
gt; improvements and user requests to the "upstream" authors of works
> > included in our system.
>
> well, the new first sentence sound for me just a bit too bureocratic
> (I'm indifferent with s/write/create/).
Tel
the changes than on the actual interpretation of the
> SC, so it could be easier to reach an agreement on the Addendum text.
I don't think that several pages of mental diffs are conductive to
understanding, so pure conservatism doesn't sound like a good
justification for doi
haven't read it" is not a decent argument. I don't believe
this proposal contains anything that can reasonably be considered a
controversial change; while some people may not *like* what the social
contract currently says, this is pretty clearly what it *does* say, if
you sit and thin
; for non-free packages."
Which is how I had it originally (first draft), and somebody
objected. I recall that they had a valid point, but I'll have to go
digging to remember what it was.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
o arguments based on "more intuitive".
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
gt; improvements and user requests to the "upstream" authors of works
> > included in our system.
>
> well, the new first sentence sound for me just a bit too bureocratic
> (I'm indifferent with s/write/create/).
Tel
the changes than on the actual interpretation of the
> SC, so it could be easier to reach an agreement on the Addendum text.
I don't think that several pages of mental diffs are conductive to
understanding, so pure conservatism doesn't sound like a good
justification for doi
haven't read it" is not a decent argument. I don't believe
this proposal contains anything that can reasonably be considered a
controversial change; while some people may not *like* what the social
contract currently says, this is pretty clearly what it *does* say, if
you sit and thin
; for non-free packages."
Which is how I had it originally (first draft), and somebody
objected. I recall that they had a valid point, but I'll have to go
digging to remember what it was.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 07:40:49PM +0100, Martin Schulze wrote:
> Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > > > >hardware manufacturers (in the last instance) only. Do you think that
> > > > >they produce everything built in their devices?
> > > >
> > > &
On Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 07:40:49PM +0100, Martin Schulze wrote:
> Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > > > >hardware manufacturers (in the last instance) only. Do you think that
> > > > >they produce everything built in their devices?
> > > >
> > > &
on-free are allowed, but not
> > depends, as it currently the case.
>
> I was under the impression that we only allow Suggests: on non-free
> packages.
It's got more or less nothing to do with non-free. We only allow
Suggests on packages
on-free are allowed, but not
> > depends, as it currently the case.
>
> I was under the impression that we only allow Suggests: on non-free
> packages.
It's got more or less nothing to do with non-free. We only allow
Suggests on packages
proposed nonfree.org.
As currently written, the option to drop non-free is the closest that
a GR can come to fulfilling what you want.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
dware that is 10 times slower or incompatible
> to what 95% of the market uses, beeing 200% more expensive?
Ah, the old argument that says free software can never possibly work
or compete with commercial software.
--
.''
On Sun, Mar 07, 2004 at 11:42:16PM +, Stephen Stafford wrote:
> Given that the DPL is, in many ways, the
> representative of Debian to the world
Is that *really* true, and should it be?
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' :
proposed nonfree.org.
As currently written, the option to drop non-free is the closest that
a GR can come to fulfilling what you want.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
dware that is 10 times slower or incompatible
> to what 95% of the market uses, beeing 200% more expensive?
Ah, the old argument that says free software can never possibly work
or compete with commercial software.
--
.''
On Sun, Mar 07, 2004 at 11:42:16PM +, Stephen Stafford wrote:
> Given that the DPL is, in many ways, the
> representative of Debian to the world
Is that *really* true, and should it be?
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' :
ages the authors to change their
licenses"
"The opposite is at least as likely"
[I don't think it has any real effect, either; I find both
possibilities to be unlikely to the point of absurdity]
-
On Sat, Mar 06, 2004 at 11:22:06AM +, Peter Samuelson wrote:
>
> [Andrew Suffield]
> > "We can't be sure whether this orange-haired person likes to eat
> > babies or not. He probably does, lock him up".
>
> Not that a baby-eating example isn't
ages the authors to change their
licenses"
"The opposite is at least as likely"
[I don't think it has any real effect, either; I find both
possibilities to be unlikely to the point of absurdity]
-
On Sat, Mar 06, 2004 at 11:22:06AM +, Peter Samuelson wrote:
>
> [Andrew Suffield]
> > "We can't be sure whether this orange-haired person likes to eat
> > babies or not. He probably does, lock him up".
>
> Not that a baby-eating example isn't
On Sat, Mar 06, 2004 at 09:05:27AM +, Peter Samuelson wrote:
>
> [Andrew Suffield]
> > Psychology and sociology are fuzzy "sciences" for the most part,
> > where very little is proven. That does not mean that the standards
> > for proof should be lowere
On Fri, Mar 05, 2004 at 07:06:50PM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 05, 2004 at 03:35:03PM +, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> >> On Fri, Mar 05, 2004 at 08:21:08AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> >> > You have an alternate theory explaining the low inciden
On Fri, Mar 05, 2004 at 06:26:44PM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Mar 2004 19:58:03 +0000, Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> > On Fri, Mar 05, 2004 at 01:16:43PM -0500, David Nusinow wrote:
> >> On Fri, Mar 05, 2004 at 03:35:03PM +, Andre
On Fri, Mar 05, 2004 at 09:39:50PM -0500, David Nusinow wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 05, 2004 at 09:48:13PM +0000, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > The alternative is that there is nothing interesting here. It's not a
> > very interesting alternative. Occam's razor says we go with it u
On Sat, Mar 06, 2004 at 09:05:27AM +, Peter Samuelson wrote:
>
> [Andrew Suffield]
> > Psychology and sociology are fuzzy "sciences" for the most part,
> > where very little is proven. That does not mean that the standards
> > for proof should be lowere
1 - 100 of 409 matches
Mail list logo
