> If you are more upset at my describing the Catholic Church as protecting
> child molesters than you are at the Church for actually protecting child
> molesters
I'm not, and your rhetoric is ridiculous.
Devin
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 11:10 PM, Steven D'Aprano
wrote:
> Devin Jeanpierre wrote:
>
Devin Jeanpierre wrote:
> I also didn't reprimand anyone, except maybe Steven.
If you are more upset at my describing the Catholic Church as protecting
child molesters than you are at the Church for actually protecting child
molesters, then your priorities are completely screwed up and your
repri
Ethan Furman wrote:
Ben Finney wrote:
But whoever takes that joke and says it's deliberately hurtful is being
presumptuous and censorious and unreasonable. If they then castigate the
joker for supposedly hurting someone's feelings, it's at that point the
atmosphere turns hostile to discussion.
On 30/09/2011 00:21, Ethan Furman wrote:
Ben Finney wrote:
But whoever takes that joke and says it's deliberately hurtful is being
presumptuous and censorious and unreasonable. If they then castigate the
joker for supposedly hurting someone's feelings, it's at that point the
atmosphere turns hos
Ben Finney wrote:
But whoever takes that joke and says it's deliberately hurtful is being
presumptuous and censorious and unreasonable. If they then castigate the
joker for supposedly hurting someone's feelings, it's at that point the
atmosphere turns hostile to discussion.
Um, wasn't it Rantin
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 9:03 AM, Devin Jeanpierre
wrote:
> But anyway, no, we don't agree on what it means to be friendly or what
> a hostile atmosphere is. I've noticed that people tend to be a lot
> harsher here than what I'm used to, so perhaps your attitude to it is
> more common on mailing-li
> There we disagree. The hurt feelings of someone who attaches their identity
> to a text should not restrain our discourse.
Yes, we do.
> That would eliminate just about every joke: a huge range of jokes *depend*
> for their humour on connecting seemingly-unrelated ideas. So by your logic,
> we
On 29-Sep-2011, Devin Jeanpierre wrote:
> >> This was a technical discussion, and calling the bible a joke was not
> >> necessary at all. It creates a hostile atmosphere.
> >
> > I disagree. It was not an attack on any person nor group of people. If
> > we are to be required to avoid jokes not dire
MRAB writes:
> On 29/09/2011 04:05, Ben Finney wrote:
> > But the topic of keeping this forum safe for technical discussion
> > entails that it must be safe for *any* idea to be the butt of a
> > joke, be it a religious text or the Zen of Python, and that is very
> > much on-topic.
>
> Even if it
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 02:49:05PM -0400, Devin Jeanpierre wrote:
> >> This was a technical discussion, and calling the bible a joke was not
> >> necessary at all. It creates a hostile atmosphere.
> >
> > I disagree. It was not an attack on any person nor group of people. If
> > we are to be requir
On Sep 29, 2011, at 9:37 PM, Navkirat Singh wrote:
> I am looking for the python mailing list. . ? Have you guys seen it
> somewhere? I think I accidently reached the cry-me-a-river list?
The portal can be reactivated by intoning Bobby Brown Goes Down in unison.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailm
Petite Abeille wrote:
On Sep 29, 2011, at 8:49 PM, Devin Jeanpierre wrote:
It could certainly be _interpreted_ as an attack
(and was interpreted that way), and that's really all that's necessary
for a hostile environment.
In other news:
http://alt.textdrive.com/assets/public/non/nq050616.gi
Hi,
I am looking for the python mailing list. . ? Have you guys seen it
somewhere? I think I accidently reached the cry-me-a-river list?
Regards,
Nav
On Sep 30, 2011 1:03 AM, "Petite Abeille" wrote:
>
> On Sep 29, 2011, at 8:49 PM, Devin Jeanpierre wrote:
>
>> It could certainly be _interpreted_
On Sep 29, 2011, at 8:49 PM, Devin Jeanpierre wrote:
> It could certainly be _interpreted_ as an attack
> (and was interpreted that way), and that's really all that's necessary
> for a hostile environment.
In other news:
http://alt.textdrive.com/assets/public/non/nq050616.gif
--
Tout le monde
>> This was a technical discussion, and calling the bible a joke was not
>> necessary at all. It creates a hostile atmosphere.
>
> I disagree. It was not an attack on any person nor group of people. If
> we are to be required to avoid jokes not directed at people, then *that*
> is an atmosphere hos
On 29/09/2011 04:05, Ben Finney wrote:
Devin Jeanpierre writes:
Forget money, or even the love of money. The idea that one mustn't
criticise another person's beliefs is the root of all evil.
This was a technical discussion, and calling the bible a joke was not
necessary at all. It creates a
Devin Jeanpierre writes:
> > Forget money, or even the love of money. The idea that one mustn't
> > criticise another person's beliefs is the root of all evil.
>
> This was a technical discussion, and calling the bible a joke was not
> necessary at all. It creates a hostile atmosphere.
I disagre
> Forget money, or even the love of money. The idea that one mustn't
> criticise another person's beliefs is the root of all evil.
This was a technical discussion, and calling the bible a joke was not
necessary at all. It creates a hostile atmosphere.
Can't you pick somewhere else to attack Chris
18 matches
Mail list logo
