On Mon, 14 May 2001, JTK wrote:
>> On Sun, 13 May 2001, JTK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> lordpixel wrote:
>>>> As an aside: Your use of deliberate mispellings (Maozilla) is
>>>> unnecessary.
>>> Unnecessarily HI-LARIOUS!
>> Don't flatter yourself.
> Got you to read it.
That's not hard, I read almost all my mail.
>>> Take a look at this picture of a Soviet WWII-vintage Yakolev 7-B:
>>> http://hep2.physics.arizona.edu/~savin/ram/yak-7b-color.jpg
>> That's one cool plane!
> Pfhht, that's nothing! Look at all the Luftwaffe's *way* cooler
> planes:
> http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/LRG/index.html
> So when's Maozilla getting the swastikas?
You're about 3 years too late to be making that suggestion. Maybe if
you had suggested it it then, it would have been picked instead.
>> Oh, BTW, it's "Yakovlev" not "Yakolev".
> So it is, so it is. In fact, I'd have to guess it actually uses
> Cyrillic letters, so you're misspelling it as bad as I am.
Nope, my spelling is the accepted transliteration, while yours is
incorrect on both counts.
>>> And when I first saw it, I wondered aloud "what's with the commie
>>> graphics?". Assuming Mozilla was a successful product, which do
>>> you think would be the majority reaction amongst users?
>> In all likelihood, none, since Mozilla is not targeted at "users"
>> but at "distributors". Thankfully, distributors tend to be much
>> more interested in the technical abilities of the product they will
>> be using rather than any possible political parallels that may be
>> found in the project's artwork.
> Yeah, you just keep tellin' yourself that.
Keep telling myself what? That distributors like Netscape/AOL, Beonex,
IBM and RedHat care more about the product than the artwork?
I haven't heard any of them complain about it, and they all seem to be
positively contributing to the project, and they are all shipping
versions of Mozilla, so why would I have to "keep telling myself
that"? Do you have reason to believe that, say, IBM is unhappy with
Mozilla because of its artwork?
>>> Do you have any idea what Soviet==Communism is all about? *Any*
>>> idea? Clearly not, so let me put it this way: if we were in, say,
>>> the now-defunct USSR, or even present-day China, having this
>>> discussion, I'd probably have a govenment-issued 7.62mm pistol
>>> bullet in my forehead by now. Why? Because I "questioned
>>> authority". Because I "asked the wrong questions".
>>
>> I think you might be confusing "communism" with "dictatorship".
> [...] You are exposing your ignorance of history my friend.
I am quite sure that I am not your friend.
> Communism is Marxism bastardized into dictatorship. Nothing more.
# com�mu�nism (kmy-nzm) n.
# 1. A theoretical economic system characterized by the collective
# ownership of property and by the organization of labor for the
# common advantage of all members.
# 2. A system of government in which the state plans and controls the
# economy and a single, often authoritarian party holds power,
# claiming to make progress toward a higher social order in which all
# goods are equally shared by the people.
# 3. The Marxist-Leninist version of Communist doctrine that advocates
# the overthrow of capitalism by the revolution of the proletariat.
-- The American Heritage� Dictionary of the English Language,
Third Edition
Nope, no mention of "dictatorship" there. Again, you are proving quite
apt at not having a clue.
As I pointed out in my previous post, not all communist societies fall
into dictatorship. In practice, small communist communities (e.g.,
isolated tribes) are able to survive for centuries.
>>> And you think it's OK for Mozilla to be associated with that.
>>> Jinkies.
>>
>> We should be proud to be associated with an ideal model for
>> society.
>
> "Freedom has many difficulties, and democracy is not perfect. But we
> have never had to put a wall up to keep our people in." - John
> Fitzgerald Kennedy
An ideal communist society is also a form of democracy.
# de�moc�ra�cy (d-mkr-s) n., pl. de�moc�ra�cies.
# 1. Government by the people, exercised either directly or through
# elected representatives.
# 2. A political or social unit that has such a government.
# 3. The common people, considered as the primary source of political
# power.
# 4. Majority rule.
# 5. The principles of social equality and respect for the individual
# within a community.
-- The American Heritage� Dictionary of the English Language,
Third Edition
Note in particular definition 5.
>> (Free software projects (including Mozilla) often naturally end up
>> following another model for society, namely meritocracy.
>
> Mozilla is not a Free Software project. It is an "Open Software"
> project. Don't kid yourself.
Mozilla is BOTH a Free Software project (when you get a copy of the code
you are Free to do whatever you want with it, so long as you don't
prevent other people from doing whatever _they_ want) AND an Open Source
project (the source code is publically available).
Definition of Free Software:
http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/free-sw.html
Definition of Open Source:
http://opensource.org/docs/definition.html
When I describe its free nature, I like to emphasise the Free Software
aspect of it rather than the Open Source aspect. For why, see:
http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.html
Maybe you should research this subject before commenting further.
>> Of course, free software projects are not full societies, merely
>> communities, so they are able to stay as meritocracies without
>> turning into "evil".)
>
> Are they?
The only "evil" I've seen in the free software projects I'm involved
in has been the presence of various trolls such as yourself.
>>> Can't be you, you don't even realize the evils of Communism.
>> Clearly not. How can shared wealth, equal work and no poverty be
>> evil? Oh wait, you're talking about dictatorships again. Sorry.
> "There are many people in the world who really don't understand - or
> say they don't - what is the great issue between the Free World and
> the Communist world. Let them come to Berlin. There are some who say
> that Communism is the wave of the future. Let them come to Berlin.
> And there are some who say, in Europe and elsewhere, "We can work
> with the Communists". Let them come to Berlin. And there are even a
> few who say that it's true that Communism is an evil system, but it
> permits us to make economic progress. La�t sie nach Berlin kommen."
> - John Fitzgerald Kennedy
| "Freedom has many difficulties and democracy is not perfect."
-- John Fitzgerald Kennedy, one sentence later in the same speech.
Your point?
>> BTW, I noticed that you are not using your real e-mail address:
> BTW, I notice you place a great deal of import on somebody's email
> address.
Not at all -- I merely ask for a means to identify with whom I am
talking. You could use your real name instead of your initials, or you
could give a phone number, or an IRC network on which one could
contact you, or a website where one could go to find out how to
contact you -- any of them would be sufficient. (You'll notice I do
all of the above.)
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> There's no "netscape.com" on there.
Better tell your client. Even without the .netscape.com suffix,
though, the address is still invalid, indeed the domain is not even
registered.
>> Is this because you are too ashamed of your trolling to do it
>> without a veil of anonymity?
>
> Not at all.
So why _do_ you post anonymously? Are you worried some "communist"
might hunt you down and kill you?
> I simply didn't figure anybody had anything to say to me that they'd
> be ashamed to say in public.
| I take pride in the words "Ich bin ein Berliner."
-- John Fitzgerald Kennedy
What do you take pride in? "I am an anonymous troll"?
--
Ian Hickson )\ _. - ._.) fL
Netscape, Standards Compliance QA /. `- ' ( `--'
+1 650 937 6593 `- , ) - > ) \
irc.mozilla.org:Hixie _________________________ (.' \) (.' -' __________
