Scripsit Kevin Kreamer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In the case of a NetBSD libc, you could use
Debian NBSD/NBSD
basically having the first half signify which libc is used.
Wouldn't that be a major retcon? AFAIU the GNU/ in Debian GNU/Linux
says that we're using GNU userland tools such as cp, mv,
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 05:03:55AM +, Henning Makholm wrote:
Scripsit Kevin Kreamer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In the case of a NetBSD libc, you could use
Debian NBSD/NBSD
basically having the first half signify which libc is used.
Wouldn't that be a major retcon? AFAIU the GNU/ in
Scripsit Joel Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 03:05:46PM +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 14:39, Joel Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Imagining it? I suppose it's possible that I've hallucinated the
stated positions of the Catholic, Luthern, Episopalian,
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 01:54:14PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 03:13:03PM -0500, Nathan Hawkins wrote:
If we're really worried about this, we can always use the names of the
Dwarves in the Hobbit. Most (all?) of those names are from Icelandic
sags, IIRC. So is
Branden == Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Branden Remember, outside the Free Software community, copyright is
Branden used only as a destructive weapon, not a tool for promoting
Branden cooperation and harmony.
It looks like not only outside Free Software community, considering
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 05:03:55AM +, Henning Makholm wrote:
Scripsit Kevin Kreamer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In the case of a NetBSD libc, you could use
Debian NBSD/NBSD
basically having the first half signify which libc is used.
Wouldn't that be a major
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 10:41:46AM +0100, Mathieu Roy wrote:
You are currently saying that the GNU in GNU/Linux is justified by the
glibc and not by any other GNU software, because these GNU software
are common on other unixes.
Why? If you are right that others unixes uses widely GNU
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 11:26:10AM -0600, Chad Walstrom wrote:
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 04:42:28PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
Well, just for the record, i personnally would prefer we don't use
demon name for keyword if possible.
Forgive me for the gratuitous Harry Potter reference, but fear
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 06:37:56PM -0600, Kevin Kreamer wrote:
[I am not subscribed to debian-bsd.]
On Dec 17, 2003, at 10:20, Branden Robinson wrote:
Given that we're going to be saddled with with a comprehension problem
anyway, I say we abandon the effort to be descriptive in the product
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If we ever get a replacement libc that would really work as
replacement... on such system GNU claims would become much weaker. Not
that there was a serious chance of that happening - drop-in replacement
of glibc on Linux would be a lot of work and so far none of the
Am 18.12.03 um 11:05:36 schrieb Sven Luther:
That would be a funny naming scheme. That said, how would we then
differentiate the three BSD ports ? GNU/First one that shall not be
named and so one ?
Exactly:
Debian GNU/First one that shall not be named
Debian GNU/Next one that shall not be
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 12:56:15PM +0100, Julian Mehnle wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If we ever get a replacement libc that would really work as
replacement... on such system GNU claims would become much weaker. Not
that there was a serious chance of that happening - drop-in replacement
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 15:15, Joel Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The Anglican church is, in fact, the most likely among anyone except the
UUs to (eventually) decide that it's OK, for the same reasons that they
have (now) decided that it's OK to have gay clergy and formal recognition
of
On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 00:10, David Palmer. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Supply all of the relevant, and none of the extraneous:-
Debian GNU/Free
Debian GNU/Net
Debian GNU/Open
I disagree. Debian GNU/Linux is free, it works well on the net, and it is
open.
I think that your naming suggestion
On Thu, 2003-12-18 at 20:08, Michael Piefel wrote:
Am 18.12.03 um 11:05:36 schrieb Sven Luther:
That would be a funny naming scheme. That said, how would we then
differentiate the three BSD ports ? GNU/First one that shall not be
named and so one ?
Exactly:
Debian GNU/First one that
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nunya) wrote on 17.12.03 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 11:35:54AM +0800, Cameron Patrick wrote:
| You are totally rationalizing.
*sigh* From Branden's original post where he mentioned the names:
We might use names from Christian demonology (since
Sven == Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Sven That would be a funny naming scheme. That said, how would we then
Sven differentiate the three BSD ports ? GNU/First one that shall not be
Sven named and so one ?
Indeed !
GNU/First one that shall not be named
GNU/Next one that shall not be
Mathieu == Mathieu Roy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Mathieu If we follow your theory, it means that if someday another
Mathieu system use the glibc, we should remove the GNU from the
Mathieu GNU/Linux name.
FWIW, BeOS uses glibc.
~velco
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 01:05:00PM +0200, Kai Henningsen wrote:
... neither of the two above, who are pretty obviously losers (even though
they're certainly on very different sides; surprise, sometimes there's
more than two of 'em).
There's more than one actual difference between the
Momchil Velikov wrote:
Sven == Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Sven That would be a funny naming scheme. That said, how would we then
Sven differentiate the three BSD ports ? GNU/First one that shall not be
Sven named and so one ?
Indeed !
GNU/First one that shall not be named
GNU/Next one
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Cameron Patrick) wrote on 18.12.03 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 01:32:41AM +, Scott James Remnant wrote:
| On Thu, 2003-12-18 at 01:16, Nunya wrote:
|
| Face it. You're practicing hate speech. You're not better than what
| you hate.
|
| Ya
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Joel Baker) wrote on 17.12.03 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 07:25:11PM -0800, Nunya wrote:
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 07:56:41PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
For the record, however, if you consider saying that the lifestyle or
beliefs of someone you don't
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003, Russell Coker wrote:
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 15:15, Joel Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The Anglican church is, in fact, the most likely among anyone except the
UUs to (eventually) decide that it's OK, for the same reasons that they
have (now) decided that it's OK to have
Julian Mehnle dijo [Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 12:56:15PM +0100]:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If we ever get a replacement libc that would really work as
replacement... on such system GNU claims would become much weaker. Not
that there was a serious chance of that happening - drop-in replacement
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Henning Makholm) wrote on 18.12.03 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Scripsit Joel Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 03:05:46PM +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 14:39, Joel Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Imagining it? I suppose it's possible that
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 02:26:27PM +0200, Momchil Velikov wrote:
Mathieu == Mathieu Roy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Mathieu If we follow your theory, it means that if someday another
Mathieu system use the glibc, we should remove the GNU from the
Mathieu GNU/Linux name.
rereads
Arrgh...
My
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 11:30:57PM +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 15:15, Joel Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The Anglican church is, in fact, the most likely among anyone except the
UUs to (eventually) decide that it's OK, for the same reasons that they
have (now) decided
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 07:43:27PM -0800, Nunya wrote:
The US is pretty adamant about separation of church and state.
Which is why the phrase In God We Trust is engraved or printed on all
the US currency. That's why the Pledge of Allegiance has the phrase,
Under God.. Yeah, adamant.
--
Chad
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 12:52:00PM +0200, Kai Henningsen wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Joel Baker) wrote on 17.12.03 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Since you have no idea *what* civil rights I'm claiming are denied, your
claim that I'm just imagining this denial is... well, I'll just let it
stand on
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 12:06:56PM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 12:56:15PM +0100, Julian Mehnle wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If we ever get a replacement libc that would really work as
replacement... on such system GNU claims would become much weaker.
Not
On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 09:49:06 -0800, Nunya [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 01:38:45AM +0800, Cameron Patrick wrote:
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 08:53:18AM -0800, Nunya wrote:
| I don't believe in magical beings. I *do* believe some humans |
intentionally set out to hurt other
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 05:21:23AM +, Henning Makholm wrote:
Scripsit Joel Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 03:05:46PM +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 14:39, Joel Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Imagining it? I suppose it's possible that I've
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 09:48:31AM -0500, Jaldhar H. Vyas wrote:
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003, Russell Coker wrote:
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 15:15, Joel Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The Anglican church is, in fact, the most likely among anyone except
the UUs to (eventually) decide that it's OK, for
On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 11:13:52 -0500, Branden Robinson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
I think the fundies should crawl back into their spider holes to
await the Apocalypse, while us heathens and sinners who don't TRULY
know the saving grace of Jesus Christ can get back to making the
world a better
This one time, at band camp, Tom said:
Y'all are going to bust a vein on this one.
So far, on *.debian.org, I've found a great many people who actively
hate Jesus, this german who apparently has familiar views on Jews (as
does frighteningly much of Europe), and a whole bunch of college
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 10:41:46AM +0100, Mathieu Roy wrote:
You are currently saying that the GNU in GNU/Linux is justified by the
glibc and not by any other GNU software, because these GNU software
are common on other unixes.
Maybe what he was saying, but that's obviously not the real issue.
On Thu 12/18/03 08:43, Chad Walstrom wrote:
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 07:43:27PM -0800, Nunya wrote:
The US is pretty adamant about separation of church and state.
Which is why the phrase In God We Trust is engraved or printed on all
the US currency. That's why the Pledge of Allegiance has
Adamant about the seperation of state and non-christian churches[0].
But, of course us weirdos[1] in california decided the pledge was
unconstitutional... of course I'm sure that was overturned[2].
No, not overturned. Waiting on appeal to the Supreme Court, which takes
its Own Sweet Time to do
What are the UUs?
Unitarian Universalists.
Possibly the most liberal church in existence. I think they're great.
;-) They don't require adherence to any doctrine (you can even be a UU
atheist; although it started out as a Christian group, that's now
optional). They're very big on social
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 09:31:17AM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
Somehow, I don't think Branden will mind being told his dislike of
parochial religious fundamentalists is showing. I suspect he'd be proud
of it. But you'll see for yourself, soon enough.
I've known some quite nice people who had
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 12:25:31PM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
Adamant about the seperation of state and non-christian churches[0].
But, of course us weirdos[1] in california decided the pledge was
unconstitutional... of course I'm sure that was overturned[2].
No, not overturned. Waiting
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 07:39:51AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 09:49:06 -0800, Nunya [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 01:38:45AM +0800, Cameron Patrick wrote:
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 08:53:18AM -0800, Nunya wrote:
| I don't believe in magical
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 05:19:28PM -0800, Nunya wrote:
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 02:19:46PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
I believe that if you cared to do the research on Usenet and mailing list
debates of this kind, my statement above is defensible as fact on rigorous
statistical grounds.
[I am not subscribed to debian-bsd.]
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 11:33:48PM +0800, Cameron Patrick wrote:
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 10:24:04AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
| Demons are evil,
|
| Demons don't exist. Consequently, their moral value is undefinable.
I claim that their moral
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 08:17:03AM -0800, Nunya wrote:
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 10:31:53AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
On Tue, Dec 16, 2003 at 05:23:39PM -0800, Nunya wrote:
On Tue, Dec 16, 2003 at 04:12:56PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
Because Christians are the people who primarily
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 10:18:41AM -0800, Nunya wrote:
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 07:39:51AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 09:49:06 -0800, Nunya [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 01:38:45AM +0800, Cameron Patrick wrote:
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 10:07:44PM -0600, Graham Wilson wrote:
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 10:03:00PM -0600, Graham Wilson wrote:
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 06:44:58PM -0800, Nunya Who wrote:
Oh, its our good friend Tom Ballard. Maybe you could get back to working
on Debian and stop trolling now?
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 01:32:41AM +, Scott James Remnant wrote:
On Thu, 2003-12-18 at 01:16, Nunya wrote:
Face it. You're practicing hate speech. You're not better than what
you hate.
Ya know, I've always wondered something when people say things like
this...
If I say I hate
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 01:53:26PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 10:07:44PM -0600, Graham Wilson wrote:
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 10:03:00PM -0600, Graham Wilson wrote:
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 06:44:58PM -0800, Nunya Who wrote:
Oh, its our good friend Tom Ballard.
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 08:43:29AM -0600, Chad Walstrom wrote:
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 07:43:27PM -0800, Nunya wrote:
The US is pretty adamant about separation of church and state.
Which is why the phrase In God We Trust is engraved or printed on all
the US currency. That's why the Pledge
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 12:40:06PM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote:
I guess someone from a culture with a caste system would believe that:
It is justified to sneer and think inferior certain people.
We don't buy that shit here.
plonk
I've noticed that and the Godwin (with no mention of
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 01:44:59PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 05:19:28PM -0800, Nunya wrote:
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 02:19:46PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
I believe that if you cared to do the research on Usenet and mailing list
debates of this kind, my
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 10:13:29AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
Cf. Jesux.
...which has gone for some years without attracting anyone who is both
pious enough and clueful enough to develop it.
I find this inverse correlation suggestive. :)
Or, it could be that Jesux wasn't really
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 04:31:42AM +, Henning Makholm wrote:
Scripsit Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 01:12:21AM +, Henning Makholm wrote:
I think you trimmed away content that was crucial for understanding the
parts you did quote, but whatever. If you
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 10:41:12AM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
The thought goes something like this:
Well, the mascot of ALL the BSD derivatives is a daemon, in various forms
(and, I will note, they are quite adament about it *not* being a demon,
which is why the form is *always* a
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 03:02:29PM +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 14:43, Nunya [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The US is pretty adamant about separation of church and state.
Point to something specific, and we'll kick the fuckers out.
I along with many others are looking forward
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 04:20:46PM -0500, Aaron M. Ucko wrote:
Nathan Hawkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If you wanted Greek names, there are plenty of obscure nymphs, satyrs,
centaurs, etc. to choose from. Since the Greeks classified them as
neither evil spirits nor deities, many of them
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 13:42:23 -0500
Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Actually, I think daemons first showed up in the _Fiend Folio_, which
means we have the British to thank for this confusion. ;-)
What about Maxwell's daemon? This is usually thought to be the
computer origin of
[ Re-adding Cc to debian-bsd, since it's a serious naming proposal ]
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 03:12:05PM -0500, Jim Penny wrote:
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 13:42:23 -0500
Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Actually, I think daemons first showed up in the _Fiend Folio_, which
means we have
Scripsit Joel Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The 'slander', if such it is (and I, obviously, don't consider it such)
is against the named set of churches, and those that follow their doctrinal
decrees
Claiming that Christians are against civil liberties is slander in my
book. You named, among other,
Scripsit Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 04:31:42AM +, Henning Makholm wrote:
Which would amount to saying We won't tell you why, but please change
your name. I think that would be discouteous in the extreme.
No, they simply could have said that they were
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 08:50:48PM +, Henning Makholm wrote:
Scripsit Joel Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The 'slander', if such it is (and I, obviously, don't consider it such)
is against the named set of churches, and those that follow their doctrinal
decrees
Claiming that Christians
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[I am not subscribed to debian-bsd.]
Alle 21:13, mercoledì 17 dicembre 2003, Nathan Hawkins ha scritto:
If you wanted Greek names, there are plenty of obscure nymphs, satyrs,
centaurs, etc. to choose from.
Here's the name index from Ovid's
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 10:41:12AM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
The Christian concept of a demon is a corruption (as it were) of the Greek
concept of daemon
Basically, no arguments with what you said, except I find inconsistent
the fact that the original guys said it's a daemon, explicitly not a
On Mon, 15 Dec 2003, Joel Baker wrote:
Besides, using Tolkien names is a long geek tradition.
And that's what's wrong with it. The association of geeks and Tolkien is
such a cliche[1] Same goes for Pratchett (not to mention he is rather
overrated in my opinion.)
No if you're going to go
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
And, pray tell, why is that? Hindu mythology had demons far
longer than Christianity (indeed, probably longer than any of the
faiths of the descendents of Abraham).
If you are refering to Asuras, demon isn't quite the right word. They are
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 11:26:10AM -0600, Chad Walstrom wrote:
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 04:42:28PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
Well, just for the record, i personnally would prefer we don't use
demon name for keyword if possible.
Forgive me for the gratuitous Harry Potter reference, but fear
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 04:42:28PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
Well, just for the record, i personnally would prefer we don't use
demon name for keyword if possible.
Forgive me for the gratuitous Harry Potter reference, but fear of a
name increases fear for the thing itself. ;-p
IOW, lighten up,
On Wed, 2003-12-17 at 12:26, Chad Walstrom wrote:
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 04:42:28PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
Well, just for the record, i personnally would prefer we don't use
demon name for keyword if possible.
Forgive me for the gratuitous Harry Potter reference, but fear of a
name
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 09:09:37AM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 10:54:15AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
[I am not subscribed to debian-bsd.]
On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 06:00:21PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
Even so, I'm amenable to anyone who can come up with names which
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 10:21:24AM -0800, Nunya wrote:
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 10:41:12AM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
The Christian concept of a demon is a corruption (as it were) of the Greek
concept of daemon
Basically, no arguments with what you said, except I find inconsistent
the
Nathan Hawkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If you wanted Greek names, there are plenty of obscure nymphs, satyrs,
centaurs, etc. to choose from. Since the Greeks classified them as
neither evil spirits nor deities, many of them would qualify as daemons
in the classical sense.
We could also go
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 02:54:28PM -0500, Stephen Depooter wrote:
On Wed, 2003-12-17 at 12:26, Chad Walstrom wrote:
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 04:42:28PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
Well, just for the record, i personnally would prefer we don't use
demon name for keyword if possible.
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 02:04:03PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
the fact that the original guys said it's a daemon, explicitly not a
Christian demon and here's you're saying yes it is. :-)
Er, no. I'm not. I'm saying that Christian demons are derived from Greek
daemons; that isn't the same
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 03:13:03PM -0500, Nathan Hawkins wrote:
If we're really worried about this, we can always use the names of the
Dwarves in the Hobbit. Most (all?) of those names are from Icelandic
sags, IIRC. So is Gandalf.
All of them. I suppose they even have enough of the right
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 11:26:10AM -0600, Chad Walstrom wrote:
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 04:42:28PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
Well, just for the record, i personnally would prefer we don't use
demon name for keyword if possible.
Forgive me for the gratuitous Harry Potter reference, but fear
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 01:22:07PM -0800, Nunya wrote:
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 02:04:03PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
the fact that the original guys said it's a daemon, explicitly not a
Christian demon and here's you're saying yes it is. :-)
Er, no. I'm not. I'm saying that Christian
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 11:42:27AM -0800, Nunya wrote:
IOW, lighten up, people. Otherwise, we'll be referring to Debian
GNU/That Which Shall Not Be Named...
Nah, bullshit. I've heard enough racists use that kind of reasoning.
It's no big deal. Face it, you have to respect people.
And
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 02:02:03PM -0600, Chad Walstrom wrote:
And way out from Right Field...
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-ridicule.html
go back and count the # of christians are stupid statements
substitute any racial or ethnic group for christians
see how the statements
Nunya [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, Dec 16, 2003 at 04:12:56PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
Because Christians are the people who primarily take offense at this
sort of thing in the context that we were discussing in this portion of
the thread.
That's another opinion expressed as a
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 04:21:40PM -0800, Nunya wrote:
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 02:02:03PM -0600, Chad Walstrom wrote:
And way out from Right Field...
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-ridicule.html
go back and count the # of christians are stupid statements
substitute
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 06:00:41PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 04:21:40PM -0800, Nunya wrote:
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 02:02:03PM -0600, Chad Walstrom wrote:
And way out from Right Field...
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-ridicule.html
go back
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 02:19:46PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
I believe that if you cared to do the research on Usenet and mailing list
debates of this kind, my statement above is defensible as fact on rigorous
statistical grounds. But I don't care enough to do the work to prove that
to
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 12:16, Nunya [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 06:00:41PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
I wasn't thinking of you, but let's take a quote of yours and see which
of these statements is most applicable:
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 12:59:38PM +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
He did not say that all Christians are religious fanatics.
Godwin.
Copout.
[I am not subscribed to debian-bsd.]
On Dec 17, 2003, at 10:20, Branden Robinson wrote:
Given that we're going to be saddled with with a comprehension problem
anyway, I say we abandon the effort to be descriptive in the product
name. I proposed having a correlation between the first letter of the
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 05:16:18PM -0800, Nunya wrote:
I wasn't thinking of you, but let's take a quote of yours and see which
of these statements is most applicable:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2003/debian-devel-200312/msg01512.html:
(religious fanatics - the one group that
On Thu, 2003-12-18 at 00:21, Nunya wrote:
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 02:02:03PM -0600, Chad Walstrom wrote:
And way out from Right Field...
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-ridicule.html
go back and count the # of christians are stupid statements
substitute any racial or
On Thu, 2003-12-18 at 01:16, Nunya wrote:
Face it. You're practicing hate speech. You're not better than what
you hate.
Ya know, I've always wondered something when people say things like
this...
If I say I hate Adolf Hitler and his cabinet, is that practising hate
speech?
Scott
--
Have
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 07:56:41PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
For the record, however, if you consider saying that the lifestyle or
beliefs of someone you don't agree with are sufficient to condemn them to
an eternity of suffering as hate speech (and I generally do), I'm on the
catching end of
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 09:49:06AM -0800, Nunya wrote:
| | I don't believe in magical beings. I *do* believe some humans
| | intentionally set out to hurt other humans. Branden's beliefs and
| | sneering disdain for some of his fellow humans is quite clear.
|
| ... and in some cases
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 07:25:11PM -0800, Nunya wrote:
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 07:56:41PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
For the record, however, if you consider saying that the lifestyle or
beliefs of someone you don't agree with are sufficient to condemn them to
an eternity of suffering as hate
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 08:39:07PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
Fair treatment is exactly what I'm claiming is being denied me, by the
large religious voting block formed by adherents of the above-listed
religions, which form a significantly more than majority share of the
population of the
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 11:35:54AM +0800, Cameron Patrick wrote:
| You are totally rationalizing.
*sigh* From Branden's original post where he mentioned the names:
We might use names from Christian demonology (since the BSD mascot
is the cute and devilish daemon), with the first letter
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 01:32:41AM +, Scott James Remnant wrote:
| On Thu, 2003-12-18 at 01:16, Nunya wrote:
|
| Face it. You're practicing hate speech. You're not better than what
| you hate.
|
| Ya know, I've always wondered something when people say things like
| this...
|
| If I
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 06:44:58PM -0800, Nunya Who wrote:
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 12:59:38PM +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
He did not say that all Christians are religious fanatics.
Godwin.
Copout.
Yes, it is too bad he is copping (sp) out on discussing all sorts of
things immediately
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 14:43, Nunya [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 08:39:07PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
Fair treatment is exactly what I'm claiming is being denied me, by the
large religious voting block formed by adherents of the above-listed
religions, which form a
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 14:39, Joel Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Imagining it? I suppose it's possible that I've hallucinated the
stated positions of the Catholic, Luthern, Episopalian, Baptist, and
Mormon authorities (the latter not technically being considered a sect
[...]
Since you have no
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 10:03:00PM -0600, Graham Wilson wrote:
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 06:44:58PM -0800, Nunya Who wrote:
Oh, its our good friend Tom Ballard. Maybe you could get back to working
on Debian and stop trolling now?
--
gram
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 03:05:46PM +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 14:39, Joel Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Imagining it? I suppose it's possible that I've hallucinated the
stated positions of the Catholic, Luthern, Episopalian, Baptist, and
Mormon authorities (the latter
1 - 100 of 208 matches
Mail list logo
