On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 02:16:10PM +0000, Clint Adams wrote: >On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 02:30:51PM +0200, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote: >> As wrote by Jonas, there is a risk of "cabalization". >> Good discussion could also start from off-topic bad threads. > >I don't care if there's a cabal to discuss whether or not America, >Hy-Brazil, Eurasia, and Scandinavia are continents or not. I don't >care if there's a cabal who thinks that Maudite doesn't taste awful. >I don't care if there's a cabal that thinks procreation is a good >thing. None of these things need to be on -private. > >There are legitimate reasons to be subscribed to -private, and >none of them require tolerating off-topic discussion. "Good" >discussion would not seem to be irrelevant. If it's not meant to >be secret, it shouldn't be there. I cannot imagine why this simple >idea would be controvertible.
Absolutely. Nobody is trying to censor these conversations, let's just have them somewere more appropriate. -- Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK. st...@einval.com Support the Campaign for Audiovisual Free Expression: http://www.eff.org/cafe/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100610143142.gg23...@einval.com