On Tue, 2009-06-02 at 22:28 -0700, Robert Wall wrote:
> The discussion of issues with sexuality, !o4o, IRC Guidelines, and
> #ubuntu-offtopic on the ubuntu-lgbt list died down about a month ago.
>
It continued apace on the Community Council mailing list, with much back
and forth between the parti
Melissa, Scott, Mark, et al.
The discussion of issues with sexuality, !o4o, IRC Guidelines, and
#ubuntu-offtopic on the ubuntu-lgbt list died down about a month ago.
Since then, I've seen a poll link about possible rules changes and
something to do with tolerance appear and then disappear from the
On Thu, 2009-04-30 at 13:16 +0100, Jimmy Forrester-Fellowes wrote:
> Hi Tony,
> thanks for the detailed email, I totally understand the channel policy
> is not intended as discrimination toward the LGBT community.
>
> I do however disagree with the suggested connotation between
> 'sexuality' and
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Whether or not sexuality is family-friendly, now that I think of it, the
inclusion of gender into that list makes even less sense.
Going by the literalist interpretation, if sexuality being in banned topics
means one can't ask if there are lesbian Ubu
Hi Tony,
thanks for the detailed email, I totally understand the channel policy is
not intended as discrimination toward the LGBT community.
I do however disagree with the suggested connotation between 'sexuality' and
'none family-friendly'. I would like to think that a conversation
involving/disc
5 matches
Mail list logo
