Hi, thanks I do not know why I misunderstood the correct meaning of coercion.... http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/coercion/ Now I know.
On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 05:07:43PM +0000, MJ Ray wrote: > Osamu Aoki <os...@debian.org> wrote: > > I am sick of seeing too many votes/policy-discussion/... to force other > > volunteers to obey particular action patters. Basic principle of this > > project should be more inclusive one and volunteer one. It should not > > be a one of exclusion and enforcement. Volunteer project should be > > based on coercion. > > I don't think coercion is a good thing and I don't think that to ask I agree :-) I wanted to say "non-forcible soft persuasion" instead in here. > other volunteers not to do particular acts is the same as "to force > other volunteers to obey". This is what I thought "Nothing in this > constitution imposes an obligation on anyone to do work for the Project" > meant. > > So, the rest of the argument falls because of the above mistake in the > first step. However, the conclusion:- The incorrect choice of word (logos) lead me to bad logic. > > Exclusion attitudes will only narrow our user/developer base and > > benefits none of us whatever opinion we have. We should thrive to find > > common ground. > > shows that you can state a good conclusion despite a bad step. Maybe > that conclusion is a common ground? Yes... Osamu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org