Joerg, et. al. wrote: > We consider... [Editorial comment]
"We" isn't qualified in either the Subject or the beginning of the post. You need to go to the end of the lengthy message to see that the "Position Statement" is from a collection of Developers, rather than Debian as a whole. "Un-official Position Statement" might be appropriate, though "A Developer Position Statement" might be better. Regardless, "we" should be clarified and quantified at the beginning of the post. The side-affect of this is that some over-zealous reporter is going to use the subject of the post to imply that all of Debian disapproves of Dunc-Tanc. This is obviously not true, as the results of the recent GR supports. Vague statements implying that "many developers" have left Debian because of Dunc-Tank is unvalidated. Footnotes to Message-Id's or URI's of digitally signed messages would carry more weight to this argument. As it is, the author of this statement requires the reader to do his or her own research to validate the statement. Not acceptable. -- Chad Walstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.wookimus.net/ assert(expired(knowledge)); /* core dump */ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]