2009/9/10 Lisi Reisz :
> And the poster himself in a private email, and also on the list, said
> that the motive I had in fact attributed to him - that he felt in some way
> threatened - was correct, tho' I had got very wrong the way in which he felt
> threatened.
No, I didn't, but I didn't want t
On Thu, 10 Sep 2009, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> That is not true and is offensive. I made no attempt to extrapolate
> to all men.
It may not have been intentional, but it certainly was implied. When
people are assigned to a class and judgements are made, those
judgements are extrapolated to members of th
2009/9/10 Lisi Reisz :
> On Thursday 10 September 2009 17:34:14 Don Armstrong wrote:
>> The reason why the comment appears to be sexist to at least a few of
>> us[1] is because it attributes motives to an individual based purely
>> on their perceived gender, and attempts to extrapolate from that to
On Thursday 10 September 2009 17:34:14 Don Armstrong wrote:
> The reason why the comment appears to be sexist to at least a few of
> us[1] is because it attributes motives to an individual based purely
> on their perceived gender, and attempts to extrapolate from that to
> the motives of all indivi
I have not followed the recent thread on the event proposed by
Marga, and I don't know what happened so far. I also don't really
want to find out. This is why I am starting a new thread.
I only saw Miriam's suggestion about a women-only list. I wanted to
react to that, and in doing so, I do not wa
On Thu, 10 Sep 2009, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> Granted, the "only contribution [..] I can identify as having come
> from a man" is a bit strong and could be perhaps be misunderstood as
> "all man do things like that" (which would in my eyes be sexist),
> but if you want no longer stated anything th
2009/9/10 Erinn Clark :
> IMO those lists are probably sufficient for women-only mailing lists. I
> don't think we need to fracture d-w, especially given its "recent"
> amount of inactivity.
That's probably the bad side of my proposal. Will this new mailing
list lower or raise the activity level?
* Miriam Ruiz [2009:09:10 11:37 +0200]:
> 2009/9/10 Holger Levsen :
> > On Mittwoch, 26. August 2009, Steve Langasek wrote:
> >> It seems to me that this comment is sexist, and has no place on any Debian
> >> mailing list.
> >
> > It seemed and seems to me you were trolling here :-(
>
> I'm just
* Steve Langasek [090910 11:57]:
> Yes? Change the gender in the original message and tell me who you think is
> trolling.
While there might be a thinkable context where such a message could be
sexist, please put the mail the context it was in:
It's about whether it makes sense to have a women-
On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 11:23:25AM +0200, Holger Levsen wrote:
> On Mittwoch, 26. August 2009, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > It seems to me that this comment is sexist, and has no place on any Debian
> > mailing list.
> It seemed and seems to me you were trolling here :-(
Yes? Change the gender in t
2009/9/10 Holger Levsen :
> On Mittwoch, 26. August 2009, Steve Langasek wrote:
>> It seems to me that this comment is sexist, and has no place on any Debian
>> mailing list.
>
> It seemed and seems to me you were trolling here :-(
I'm just thinking aloud, but I wonder if it might make sense to al
On Mittwoch, 26. August 2009, Steve Langasek wrote:
> It seems to me that this comment is sexist, and has no place on any Debian
> mailing list.
It seemed and seems to me you were trolling here :-(
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
12 matches
Mail list logo
