Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Sun, Dec 12, 2004 at 12:28:08AM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote: Not really. The rest of the explanation for non-US is that those packages weren't illegal to USE in the USA, but were illegal to EXPORT. We don't have a section for packages that you aren't allowed to have, or aren't allowed to use. France makes it illegal to use or posses cryptography (at least at one time, during the height of the crypto iron wall era --- Al Gore, Tear Down This Wall!). Yet we still shipped crypto code despite the fact that possessession of crypto without a license could land you in jail in France. Saying that we won't ship code just because it might be illegal in some random country is a very slippery slope. - Ted
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Sun, 2004-12-12 at 02:18 +0100, Robert Millan wrote: On Tue, Dec 07, 2004 at 01:06:11PM +0900, Clemens Schwaighofer wrote: True, the Koran just invites to kill your ennemy bloodily, that's very different... Thats wrong, thats just an interpretion. I wonder how could text be written such that the question wether it invites to kill someone bloodily is open to interpretation. Are there other places in the Koran that say different things? An example from the Bible: the Old Testament says that homosexuals must be stoned to death, but many times, it says, You shall love your neighbor as yourself. The true Christian response, *IMHO*, would be, love the sinner, hate the sin, since ROMANS 13:9 QUOTE 9 For the commandments, You shall not commit adultery, You shall not murder, You shall not steal, You shall not bear false witness, You shall not covet, and if there is any other commandment, are all summed up in this saying, namely, You shall love your neighbor as yourself. /QUOTE But, exegesis is a thorny topic, and really shouldn't be on d-devel. -- - Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson, LA USA PGP Key ID 8834C06B I prefer encrypted mail. There's nothing wrong with the average person that a good psychiatrist can't exaggerate. Toronto Star Newspaper signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Sun, 12 Dec 2004, Ron Johnson wrote: On Sun, 2004-12-12 at 02:18 +0100, Robert Millan wrote: On Tue, Dec 07, 2004 at 01:06:11PM +0900, Clemens Schwaighofer wrote: True, the Koran just invites to kill your ennemy bloodily, that's very different... Thats wrong, thats just an interpretion. I wonder how could text be written such that the question wether it invites to kill someone bloodily is open to interpretation. Are there other places in the Koran that say different things? An example from the Bible: the Old Testament says that homosexuals must be stoned to death, Nonsence, people were to be stoned for many things, but homosexuality was not one of them. But, exegesis is a thorny topic, and really shouldn't be on d-devel. Phil. -- Philip Charles; 39a Paterson Street, Abbotsford, Dunedin, New Zealand +64 3 488 2818Fax +64 3 488 2875Mobile 025 267 9420 [EMAIL PROTECTED] - preferred. [EMAIL PROTECTED] I sell GNU/Linux GNU/Hurd CDs DVDs. See http://www.copyleft.co.nz
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Sun, 2004-12-12 at 22:24 +1300, Philip Charles wrote: On Sun, 12 Dec 2004, Ron Johnson wrote: On Sun, 2004-12-12 at 02:18 +0100, Robert Millan wrote: On Tue, Dec 07, 2004 at 01:06:11PM +0900, Clemens Schwaighofer wrote: True, the Koran just invites to kill your ennemy bloodily, that's very different... Thats wrong, thats just an interpretion. I wonder how could text be written such that the question wether it invites to kill someone bloodily is open to interpretation. Are there other places in the Koran that say different things? An example from the Bible: the Old Testament says that homosexuals must be stoned to death, Nonsence, people were to be stoned for many things, but homosexuality was not one of them. You're right. It doesn't say stoned. However, they shall surely be put to death, is, how shall we say, a superset of stoned to death. Therefore, I was close enough. Leviticus 20 13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them. -- - Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson, LA USA PGP Key ID 8834C06B I prefer encrypted mail. Anyone who thinks that religion is Sooo Eeevil should remember: - The number of Soviet citizens that the religion is the opiate of the masses Soviets killed or let starve is between 20M and 60M. - The number of Chinese killed or allowed to starve by the Chinese Communists is estimated to be as many as 66M. Now *that* is True Evil. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
Ron Johnson wrote: On Sun, 2004-12-12 at 22:24 +1300, Philip Charles wrote: On Sun, 12 Dec 2004, Ron Johnson wrote: On Sun, 2004-12-12 at 02:18 +0100, Robert Millan wrote: On Tue, Dec 07, 2004 at 01:06:11PM +0900, Clemens Schwaighofer wrote: True, the Koran just invites to kill your ennemy bloodily, that's very different... Thats wrong, thats just an interpretion. I wonder how could text be written such that the question wether it invites to kill someone bloodily is open to interpretation. Are there other places in the Koran that say different things? An example from the Bible: the Old Testament says that homosexuals must be stoned to death, Nonsence, people were to be stoned for many things, but homosexuality was not one of them. You're right. It doesn't say stoned. However, they shall surely be put to death, is, how shall we say, a superset of stoned to death. Therefore, I was close enough. Leviticus 20 13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them. That's not anti-homosexual, that's anti-bisexual. as he lieth with a woman implies that he has to lie with women the same way as with men for it to be applicable. -- -BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK- Version: 3.1 GAT/CM$/CS$/CC/IT$/M/S/O/U dpu s+:++ !a C++$C+++$ UB+++$L$*-- P+++$ L+++()$ E-(---) W+++$ N(+) o? K- w--(---) O? M V? PS++@ PE-@ Y+@ PGP++(+++)$ t? 5? X? R tv--(-) b++(+++)@ DI? D? G e- h* r? z* --END GEEK CODE BLOCK-- David Mandelberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
* Thomas Bushnell BSG | That's a bad reason; if you applied it consistently you'd have to get | rid of frozen-bubble. everybody knows that frozen-bubble is useful for delaying Debian releases. -- Tollef Fog Heen,''`. UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are : :' : `. `' `-
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Sat, 2004-12-11 at 00:13 +, Rich Walker wrote: It is outrageous to think that China's or Saudia Arabia's censorship regimes should somehow influence our decision making in the slightest. I believe the correct flame-inducing argument at this point is tell that to the first person tortured or executed for possessing a Debian CD with hot-babe on it *who was not aware it was there*. If you live in a country with such draconian laws, then surely you ought to make sure as a matter of course about anything that you obtain from anywhere outside that country, regardless of the policy of the source with regards to including things that could get you in trouble. After all it is your life at stake. So, even if Debian were to take the position that they aren't going to include anything which might be illegal somewhere in the world[0] and that they made a genuine concerted effort, in good faith, to make sure that this was true, then I would suggest that since your life could be at stake you ought to make pretty damn certain for yourself that the CD isn't going to get you hung. Or perhaps you might like to trust that responsibility to some group whose aim is to produce a Debian CD that can safely be distributed in your country, but trusting that responsibility to the Debian developers as a whole, when your life may be at stake, would be pretty stupid of you. How many DD's do you think have the knowledge of, for example, Saudi law (not to mention incentive, time etc) necessary to make a guarantee to a person living in Saudi that a package won't get them hung? Crossed with the same knowledge for China? Crossed with the next place? You'd have to be an idiot to trust your life to those odds. [0] which I certainly don't think it should. I agree with Thomas on this one, it would be outrageous to pander to such countries. The fact that a DD is willing to package and distribute something under their local laws seem to me to imply that the package is at least safe to possess in the reasonable countries in the world, in that they won't hang you or otherwise throw the book at you for unwittingly possessing something which happens to be illegal in your jurisdiction. Ian. -- Ian Campbell When in doubt, lead trump. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Saturday 11 December 2004 01:13, Rich Walker wrote: Thomas Bushnell BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Rich Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: [3] Non-US exists because export of strong crypto from the US is an illegal act in the US. Hence, Debian has already accepted that local laws trump idealism. actually non-us is a good example of letting packages into Debian despite it being illegal in certain areas. As discussed elsewhere in this thread this translated nobody is against giving people the option of classifying packages in Debian (into 'legal in China', 'not legal in China', ...), and giving people the option to easily exclude packages in a certain category. ). Provided off course that: the people that care about such classifications do the actual work (and not offload it to the rest of us) At least one mechanism for making classifications is available (debtags), though a mechanism for exluding packages from mirrors/CD's based on tags seams currently to be missing. -- Cheers, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis) 1. Encrypted mail preferred (GPG KeyID: 0x86624ABB) 2. Plain-text mail recommended since I move html and double format mails to a low priority folder (they're mainly spam) pgpY3ZZiuVlPN.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Sat, Dec 11, 2004 at 01:24:32PM +0100, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis) wrote: On Saturday 11 December 2004 01:13, Rich Walker wrote: Thomas Bushnell BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Rich Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: [3] Non-US exists because export of strong crypto from the US is an illegal act in the US. Hence, Debian has already accepted that local laws trump idealism. actually non-us is a good example of letting packages into Debian despite it being illegal in certain areas. Not really. The rest of the explanation for non-US is that those packages weren't illegal to USE in the USA, but were illegal to EXPORT. We don't have a section for packages that you aren't allowed to have, or aren't allowed to use. I'm all for omitting hot-babe just because it's more cruft. How many CPU monitors can we possibly use? I'm not too concerned about where it's legal for adults to use it. Hamish -- Hamish Moffatt VK3SB [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Saturday 11 December 2004 14:28, Hamish Moffatt wrote: On Sat, Dec 11, 2004 at 01:24:32PM +0100, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis) wrote: On Saturday 11 December 2004 01:13, Rich Walker wrote: Thomas Bushnell BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Rich Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: [3] Non-US exists because export of strong crypto from the US is an illegal act in the US. Hence, Debian has already accepted that local laws trump idealism. actually non-us is a good example of letting packages into Debian despite it being illegal in certain areas. Not really. The rest of the explanation for non-US is that those packages weren't illegal to USE in the USA, but were illegal to EXPORT. We don't have a section for packages that you aren't allowed to have, or aren't allowed to use. point taken, make that: non-us is a good example of letting packages into Debian in a way that avoids it trumping local laws. - if it's illegal to ofer it on some-site don't offer it there, but keep it elsewhere I'm all for omitting hot-babe just because it's more cruft. How many CPU monitors can we possibly use? I'm not too concerned about where it's legal for adults to use it. If we have a DD wanting to package and mantain some cpu-monitor, then we obviously have at least 1 person who: 1) thinks the package is worthwhile 2) is willing to do the work to support it as part of Debian Given that on what basis do we decide which cpu-monitors[1] meeting the above we allow in, and which we don't? First x of any category are allowed, is not a good solution IMHO (and definately less then ideal). Moreover why should we decide any such thing? Why should we not offer software for which some DD meets 2) above? It simply gives our users more options, which (IMHO) is a good thing. [1] or text-editors, or MTA's. or ... -- Cheers, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis) 1. Encrypted mail preferred (GPG KeyID: 0x86624ABB) 2. Plain-text mail recommended since I move html and double format mails to a low priority folder (they're mainly spam) pgp3rhgQnS7YZ.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Fri, 2004-12-10 at 17:07 +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote: Op vr, 10-12-2004 te 15:38 +, schreef Will Newton: Do you see why it seems like Debian is more of a political talking shop that a team trying to develop an operating system? Debian has always been a political organization; if we weren't, we wouldn't be anything called 'DFSG'. If you two don't mind, I'd like to add this to a future signature file.
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Thu, Dec 02, 2004 at 08:03:42AM +, Helen Faulkner wrote: Yes, you are being absurd. Since you are presumably not understanding the point, let me explain more clearly: Pornography is widely regarded as being demeaning and insulting to women. The female body is beautiful. Why would drawing/displaying a picture of a woman be insulting to anyone? -- .''`. Proudly running Debian GNU/kFreeBSD unstable/unreleased (on UFS2+S) : :' : `. `'http://www.debian.org/ports/kfreebsd-gnu `-
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Tue, Dec 07, 2004 at 01:06:11PM +0900, Clemens Schwaighofer wrote: True, the Koran just invites to kill your ennemy bloodily, that's very different... Thats wrong, thats just an interpretion. I wonder how could text be written such that the question wether it invites to kill someone bloodily is open to interpretation. -- .''`. Proudly running Debian GNU/kFreeBSD unstable/unreleased (on UFS2+S) : :' : `. `'http://www.debian.org/ports/kfreebsd-gnu `-
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Fri, Dec 03, 2004 at 03:45:23AM +0100, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: * John Hasler | William Ballard writes: | The Bible should be in Debian. But the Koran, the Torah, and the Vishnu | texts (name escapes me at the moment) should all be in there too. | | Debian is not Project Gutenberg. Debian is about _software_. But the recent GR clarified that data is also software. To be exact, it stated that we don't care wether data is software, as long as it's free. -- .''`. Proudly running Debian GNU/kFreeBSD unstable/unreleased (on UFS2+S) : :' : `. `'http://www.debian.org/ports/kfreebsd-gnu `-
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Thursday 09 December 2004 14:06, Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You're coming very late to the conversation. A District Attorney angling for higher office or someone in the Morality Police (think Saudi Arabia) or a petty member of the CCP might not care about there will be conflicts like this. Let's forget about Saudi law. Saudi law is something for people who live there to worry about not for those of us who live in the free world. -- http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/ My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/postal/Postal SMTP/POP benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Fri, 2004-12-10 at 22:48 +1100, Russell Coker wrote: On Thursday 09 December 2004 14:06, Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You're coming very late to the conversation. A District Attorney angling for higher office or someone in the Morality Police (think Saudi Arabia) or a petty member of the CCP might not care about there will be conflicts like this. Let's forget about Saudi law. Saudi law is something for people who live there to worry about not for those of us who live in the free world. It is. if we want people in Arabia to be able to possess Debian disks. -- - Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson, LA USA PGP Key ID 8834C06B I prefer encrypted mail. Pacifism can act more effectively against democracy than for it. George Orwell, 1941 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: It is. if we want people in Arabia to be able to possess Debian disks. The solution to censorious regimes is not to say, well, ok, we'll censor ourselves so you don't even have to bother.
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Friday 10 Dec 2004 15:13, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: It is. if we want people in Arabia to be able to possess Debian disks. The solution to censorious regimes is not to say, well, ok, we'll censor ourselves so you don't even have to bother. Which is a fine point of view if you are making a political point. But as far as I am aware we are trying to make an operating system.
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
Op vr, 10-12-2004 te 15:22 +, schreef Will Newton: On Friday 10 Dec 2004 15:13, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: It is. if we want people in Arabia to be able to possess Debian disks. The solution to censorious regimes is not to say, well, ok, we'll censor ourselves so you don't even have to bother. Which is a fine point of view if you are making a political point. But as far as I am aware we are trying to make an operating system. Sure. So we should not censor ourselves. -- EARTH smog | bricks AIR -- mud -- FIRE soda water | tequila WATER -- with thanks to fortune
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Friday 10 Dec 2004 15:24, Wouter Verhelst wrote: Which is a fine point of view if you are making a political point. But as far as I am aware we are trying to make an operating system. Sure. So we should not censor ourselves. I don't see how that follows from what I said. Here's a couple of examples: We don't agree with censorship, so anything packageable goes in the distribution. This means we have a number of worthless and crufty packages that no-one uses and our time to release is getting ever longer. We also end up with packages that offend many people and may even cause legal problems for our distributors. We clarify the DFSG just prior to an intended release and nearly derail the whole release in the process. We are soon to refuse to ship binary firmware blobs when the writing is quite clearly on the wall that this is going to be something more and more people will have to deal with in the years to come. Do you see why it seems like Debian is more of a political talking shop that a team trying to develop an operating system? I don't want to start a flame war and I will probably not reply to this thread any longer, but the latest discussions on debian-devel have pushed me to the edge of resigning from this project.
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
Op vr, 10-12-2004 te 15:38 +, schreef Will Newton: On Friday 10 Dec 2004 15:24, Wouter Verhelst wrote: Which is a fine point of view if you are making a political point. But as far as I am aware we are trying to make an operating system. Sure. So we should not censor ourselves. I don't see how that follows from what I said. Censoring is done by people who try to make a political point. Creating an operating system involves throwing a pile of software together, integrate it, remove any and all bugs you find, and release that. It does not involve censoring. In Debian's case, we censor only based on the question whether a package is DFSG-free, nothing else. It would be wrong to act otherwise. Here's a couple of examples: We don't agree with censorship, so anything packageable goes in the distribution. That is currently not the case. There are four requirements for a package to be in main, and these are clearly spelled out in policy: they need to be DFSG-free, they must not depend on software out of main, they need to be not so buggy that we refuse to support them, and they need to be policy-compliant. This means we have a number of worthless and crufty packages that no-one uses and our time to release is getting ever longer. Packages that are worthless, crufty, unused, and unmaintained are routinely being removed from the archive. We also end up with packages that offend many people and may even cause legal problems for our distributors. Have you taken a look at what hot-babe actually looks like? I suspect you haven't. I don't think it will offend anyone. [...] Do you see why it seems like Debian is more of a political talking shop that a team trying to develop an operating system? Debian has always been a political organization; if we weren't, we wouldn't be anything called 'DFSG'. -- EARTH smog | bricks AIR -- mud -- FIRE soda water | tequila WATER -- with thanks to fortune
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Friday 10 Dec 2004 16:07, Wouter Verhelst wrote: Have you taken a look at what hot-babe actually looks like? I suspect you haven't. I don't think it will offend anyone. I have looked at it. And I don't think it is an acceptable thing to ship as part of an operating system. I am an atheist and a liberal but the majority of people in the world are not.
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Dec 10, 2004 at 16:30, Will Newton praised the llamas by saying: I have looked at it. And I don't think it is an acceptable thing to ship as part of an operating system. I am an atheist and a liberal but the majority of people in the world are not. I don't think it is an acceptable thing to ship as it has no use. -- David Pashley [EMAIL PROTECTED] Nihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione.
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
David Pashley [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Dec 10, 2004 at 16:30, Will Newton praised the llamas by saying: I have looked at it. And I don't think it is an acceptable thing to ship as part of an operating system. I am an atheist and a liberal but the majority of people in the world are not. I don't think it is an acceptable thing to ship as it has no use. Well, I tried hot-babe and it was a bit amusing for a minute or two, but I personally don't find it useful/amusing enough seeing any need for it. If, on the other hand, someone finds it useful aneough to package and maintain it, and there are a few other users interested in running it, well I can't really say anything against it. Usefulness is a subjective thing. Rotty -- Andreas Rottmann | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://yi.org/rotty | GnuPG Key: http://yi.org/rotty/gpg.asc Fingerprint | DFB4 4EB4 78A4 5EEE 6219 F228 F92F CFC5 01FD 5B62 Any technology not indistinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced. -- Terry Pratchett
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
Will Newton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Friday 10 Dec 2004 15:24, Wouter Verhelst wrote: Which is a fine point of view if you are making a political point. But as far as I am aware we are trying to make an operating system. Sure. So we should not censor ourselves. I don't see how that follows from what I said. This way: we will not submit to the decision of the Saudi Arabian or Chinese governments about what is and is not important to an operating system.
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
David Pashley [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Dec 10, 2004 at 16:30, Will Newton praised the llamas by saying: I have looked at it. And I don't think it is an acceptable thing to ship as part of an operating system. I am an atheist and a liberal but the majority of people in the world are not. I don't think it is an acceptable thing to ship as it has no use. That's a bad reason; if you applied it consistently you'd have to get rid of frozen-bubble.
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
Thomas Bushnell BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: David Pashley [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Dec 10, 2004 at 16:30, Will Newton praised the llamas by saying: I have looked at it. And I don't think it is an acceptable thing to ship as part of an operating system. I am an atheist and a liberal but the majority of people in the world are not. I don't think it is an acceptable thing to ship as it has no use. That's a bad reason; if you applied it consistently you'd have to get rid of frozen-bubble. Though you could try the following set of criteria: 1. Are there already similar packages in Debian? NO - okay, add. 2. Does it offer significant *technical* advantages over those packages? YES - okay, add. 3. Are any of those other similar packages poorly maintained? YES - don't add another until the others are cleaned up or removed - so don't add 4. Hairsplitting time - is there likelihood that adding it will cause grave distress to some proportion of the target market? NO - don't add. Default: then add it. Since there are a *lot* of CPU monitors, and a finite number of developers, and I'm sure at least one CPU monitor needs more maintenance, and wmbubblemon does the same job better, why add another? cheers, Rich. -- rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | [EMAIL PROTECTED] technical director 251 Liverpool Road | need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 www.shadow.org.uk/products/newhand.shtml
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
Rich Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Though you could try the following set of criteria: We could have all kinds of criteria. The ones you propose are not, in fact, our criteria. Our criteria are something like: 1. Does the license meet the DFSG? 2. Is there a Debian maintainer willing to maintain or sponsor the package? Now, you might want a different set of criteria, in which case, please suggest them in the proper forum, which is not here. My concern is that Saudi Arabia and China don't get to tell us what our criteria are, and I would oppose any criterion that amounts to give China a veto. Your proposal allows China a veto in some cases, and this makes it unreasonable to me. It is outrageous to think that China's or Saudia Arabia's censorship regimes should somehow influence our decision making in the slightest. Thomas
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
Thomas Bushnell BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Rich Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Though you could try the following set of criteria: [I added these back in for the sake of clarity] 1. Are there already similar packages in Debian? NO - okay, add. 2. Does it offer significant *technical* advantages over those packages? YES - okay, add. 3. Are any of those other similar packages poorly maintained? YES - don't add another until the others are cleaned up or removed - so don't add 4. Hairsplitting time - is there likelihood that adding it will cause grave distress to some proportion of the target market? NO - don't add. Default: then add it. We could have all kinds of criteria. The ones you propose are not, in fact, our criteria. Our criteria are something like: 1. Does the license meet the DFSG? 2. Is there a Debian maintainer willing to maintain or sponsor the package? These are givens. I know this. It can't move from valid-ITP to package without this. Now, you might want a different set of criteria, in which case, please suggest them in the proper forum, which is not here. Actually, I don't want a different set of criteria. As a user, I am concerned that Debian is in danger of having a thousand CPU monitors[1] all with RC bugs. A process for restricting addition of semi-duplicate packages might reduce workloads all round, and improve quality of installed packages. My concern is that Saudi Arabia and China don't get to tell us what our criteria are, and I would oppose any criterion that amounts to give China a veto. Your proposal allows China a veto in some cases, and this makes it unreasonable to me. Not quite. I simply suggest that *in the absence of any technical reason why*, and *in the presence of a social reason why not*, it would be polite to adopt why not. That social reason might be I can get tortured for possessing this and it might be pornview is tacky as a package name - come[2] up with a better one or just I believe this license isn't DFSG-free. Of course, the fact that the package under discussion can make possession of a Debian CD illegal in certain countries[3] trumps either of our arguments. It is outrageous to think that China's or Saudia Arabia's censorship regimes should somehow influence our decision making in the slightest. I believe the correct flame-inducing argument at this point is tell that to the first person tortured or executed for possessing a Debian CD with hot-babe on it *who was not aware it was there*. Testimony elsewhere in this thread suggests that *possession* in those countries is a capital crime, with or without knowledge. This would seem to make adding this package a breach of the Social Contract, clause 4. Getting your users executed un-necessarily is, it's true, a very idealist thing to do, but I can't see everyone signing up to it. cheers, Rich. Footnotes: [1] Or any other common package type. Editors. MP3 players. Playlist managers. RSS feed agglomeraters. Xbiff clones. [2] For my English readers - I did that on purpose [3] Non-US exists because export of strong crypto from the US is an illegal act in the US. Hence, Debian has already accepted that local laws trump idealism. -- rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | [EMAIL PROTECTED] technical director 251 Liverpool Road | need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 www.shadow.org.uk/products/newhand.shtml
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
Rich Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Actually, I don't want a different set of criteria. As a user, I am concerned that Debian is in danger of having a thousand CPU monitors[1] all with RC bugs. A process for restricting addition of semi-duplicate packages might reduce workloads all round, and improve quality of installed packages. That's not a problem for our procedures. Optional packages with RC bugs do not hold up the release; they simply get dropped. My concern is that Saudi Arabia and China don't get to tell us what our criteria are, and I would oppose any criterion that amounts to give China a veto. Your proposal allows China a veto in some cases, and this makes it unreasonable to me. Not quite. I simply suggest that *in the absence of any technical reason why*, and *in the presence of a social reason why not*, it would be polite to adopt why not. Your proposal gives China a veto *in some cases*. I think it should get a veto *in no cases*. Regardless, the discussion belongs on debian-project. Thomas
Re: Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 01:34:58PM -0800, Scott Robinson wrote: As long as Debian is a distribution - a precomposed packaging of as much software as possible - then there will be conflicts like this. Perhaps that's the crux of the problem - an emphasis on quantity rather than quality. Hamish -- Hamish Moffatt VK3SB [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Wednesday 08 December 2004 07:42, Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Fortunately, though, pictures of naked dogs are *not* considered to be appealing to prurient interests. Unless, *maybe*, a hyper- horny 13 year old boy is seeing a picture of dogs copulating, and not in the context of some scientific value, i.e., a text book. Even in that case, though, the boy would probably be told to wash his hand and stop being a pervert. So you have no objections to bestiality web sites then? How does a picture of dogs copulating get morphed into bestiality? When such pictures appear on porn sites they are presumably used in the same manner as other porn (not for scientific or artistic purposes). I haven't actually seen a picture of two dogs copulating on a bestiality site (when it was my job to kill such sites I just looked at the front page which was usually enough to determine whether it met the non-commercial criteria). I have seen pictures of dogs genitals on bestiality sites that were not in any way connected to humans. Are you are purposefully misinterpreting what I wrote? When you give an example of a boy needing to wash his hands after seeing a picture of dogs copulating you are obviously referring to dog-copulation porn pictures. I was interpreting it in EXACTLY the same way as you. -- http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/ My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/postal/Postal SMTP/POP benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Wed, 2004-12-08 at 19:57 +1100, Russell Coker wrote: On Wednesday 08 December 2004 07:42, Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Fortunately, though, pictures of naked dogs are *not* considered to be appealing to prurient interests. Unless, *maybe*, a hyper- horny 13 year old boy is seeing a picture of dogs copulating, and not in the context of some scientific value, i.e., a text book. Even in that case, though, the boy would probably be told to wash his hand and stop being a pervert. So you have no objections to bestiality web sites then? How does a picture of dogs copulating get morphed into bestiality? When such pictures appear on porn sites they are presumably used in the same manner as other porn (not for scientific or artistic purposes). [snip] Are you are purposefully misinterpreting what I wrote? When you give an example of a boy needing to wash his hands after seeing a picture of dogs copulating you are obviously referring to dog-copulation porn pictures. I was interpreting it in EXACTLY the same way as you. But still, a picture of dogs copulating is *not* bestiality, and I never inferred that the picture would be on a porn site (there's more to life than than the internet, after all), so I'm confused as to made the leap. -- - Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson, LA USA PGP Key ID 8834C06B I prefer encrypted mail. If you wish for peace be ready for war. Proverb To be prepared for war is one of the most effective means of preserving peace. George Washington signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
If my wife saw my son with these pictures on a disk that I gave him, she'd take a frying pan and beat me dead. And what would she say about any number of other iffy packages? bible-kjv? Probably nothing because it isn't offensive to her. fortunes-off? Because hot-babe uses graphics it's worse? As long as Debian is a distribution - a precomposed packaging of as much software as possible - then there will be conflicts like this. Scott. -- http://quadhome.com/- Personal webpage signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Wed, 2004-12-08 at 13:34 -0800, Scott Robinson wrote: If my wife saw my son with these pictures on a disk that I gave him, she'd take a frying pan and beat me dead. And what would she say about any number of other iffy packages? bible-kjv? Probably nothing because it isn't offensive to her. fortunes-off? Because hot-babe uses graphics it's worse? Definitely fortunes-off, too. As long as Debian is a distribution - a precomposed packaging of as much software as possible - then there will be conflicts like this. You're coming very late to the conversation. A District Attorney angling for higher office or someone in the Morality Police (think Saudi Arabia) or a petty member of the CCP might not care about there will be conflicts like this. -- - Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson, LA USA PGP Key ID 8834C06B I prefer encrypted mail. I'll call you women instead of girls, just so long as I get paid more than you do. Tom Lehrer signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Tuesday 07 December 2004 11:22, Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 2004-12-07 at 10:01 +1100, Brian May wrote: So are you saying I should take my web pages of my naked dogs down? Depends on who's prurient interests are appealed to by your naked dogs. Fortunately, though, pictures of naked dogs are *not* considered to be appealing to prurient interests. Unless, *maybe*, a hyper- horny 13 year old boy is seeing a picture of dogs copulating, and not in the context of some scientific value, i.e., a text book. Even in that case, though, the boy would probably be told to wash his hand and stop being a pervert. So you have no objections to bestiality web sites then? Some years ago a server in Amsterdam that I was running was overloaded due to thousands of downloads per hour of a bestiality AVI. I removed the site due to technical reasons (the entire ISP ran slow because of all the bestiality downloads). The same server had the same problem with pictures of Britney Spears, should I have removed the Britney pictures because they were obscene (no prises for guessing what they were used for) but left the animal sex pictures? -- http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/ My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/postal/Postal SMTP/POP benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
Russell Coker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tuesday 07 December 2004 11:22, Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Fortunately, though, pictures of naked dogs are *not* considered to be appealing to prurient interests. Unless, *maybe*, a hyper- horny 13 year old boy is seeing a picture of dogs copulating, and not in the context of some scientific value, i.e., a text book. Even in that case, though, the boy would probably be told to wash his hand and stop being a pervert. So you have no objections to bestiality web sites then? Some years ago a server in Amsterdam that I was running was overloaded due to thousands of downloads per hour of a bestiality AVI. I removed the site due to technical reasons (the entire ISP ran slow because of all the bestiality downloads). Did this AVI really show dogs copulating with each other (not pervert humans with a dog)? And people downloaded this in masses? The world is strange. Bye, Frank -- Frank Küster Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Zürich Debian Developer
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Wednesday 08 December 2004 01:09, Frank Küster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Fortunately, though, pictures of naked dogs are *not* considered to be appealing to prurient interests. Unless, *maybe*, a hyper- horny 13 year old boy is seeing a picture of dogs copulating, and not in the context of some scientific value, i.e., a text book. Even in that case, though, the boy would probably be told to wash his hand and stop being a pervert. So you have no objections to bestiality web sites then? Some years ago a server in Amsterdam that I was running was overloaded due to thousands of downloads per hour of a bestiality AVI. I removed the site due to technical reasons (the entire ISP ran slow because of all the bestiality downloads). Did this AVI really show dogs copulating with each other (not pervert humans with a dog)? And people downloaded this in masses? The world is strange. It involved a donkey. As far as I recall not enough of the woman was visible to be regarded as porn if it wasn't for what she was doing with the donkey. But my recollection isn't particularly clear and I never looked at it too closely. The only reason I watched it is that I forced every manager in the area to watch it in it's entirity to try and force them to give me permission to delete it (I am still surprised that so many managers were prepared to watch that AVI right through instead of granting me permission to delete it). Bestiality is legal in the Netherlands so I had to establish a new company policy on deleting commercial web sites that caused too much traffic and cost too much. It was a free web server - people who want to run commercial porn sites are supposed to pay for their bandwidth. Americans want to be moral so they ban hard-core porn. So the hard-core porn sites get run in places like the Netherlands and cater to an American audience. Americans then say that people who live in the Netherlands are perverted because they allow Americans to do what they want and make money from it. The world is indeed strange. -- http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/ My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/postal/Postal SMTP/POP benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Mon, Dec 06, 2004 at 09:25:31PM +0100, Andrea Bedini wrote: Il giorno lun, 06-12-2004 alle 01:49 +, Andrew Suffield ha scritto: Word games. Censorship is when a citizen of one body chooses to have that body distribute something (by being a citizen and distributing it), and another citizen tries to stop them. This is not the case: one member of a community chooses to do something on which community doesn't agree. So community decides to not follow his member and *let him do what he wants by his own*. Debian should not do everything a single developer wants to do; as a community we have to find a general consensus on our policy. That's censorship. Know what you're advocating, and consider its implications. -- .''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield : :' : http://www.debian.org/ | `. `' | `- -- | signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Mon, Dec 06, 2004 at 04:51:59AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: Editing would be if the maintainer decided to remove the package. Censorship is when some other developer tries to force him. If an ftp-master in the course of doing the work of processing NEW rejects a package, or a member of the release team in the course of doing the work of preparing the next stable release excludes a package from consideration, is this editing, or is it censorship? snip All of those things could be either. It is precisely because the boundaries are not clear that we must stay away from them. That's the reason why everybody who starts down the path of censorship ends up in the same place. It's extremely frustrating to see so many words spent on the notion of censorship here. At the end of the day, Debian, *as an organization*, has the right (and responsibility) to decide what it publishes on behalf of its member developers, and doing so is *not* *censorship*. It can be. In the proposed scenario it would be. And it's no wonder that Debian is slow to release when people are criticized on public lists for showing an interest in the contents and quality of packages that aren't theirs; for daring to ask the question, is this something that Debian needs? Nobody in this thread has seriously asked that question. This discussion shouldn't be about censorship, or other forms of coercion; Aye, but it is, and that line of thinking needs to be stopped while we still can. Frankly the package is irrelevant to this discussion, and the subject line is misleading. And contrary to much of the rhetoric in this thread, it is possible to think a package like hot-babe is a bad idea without wanting to be set up as a censor for all ideas they disagree with. However, it's extremely unlikely that it is possible to ban it for that reason without going down that path. There's a significant difference between thinking something is a bad idea and trying to stop it. -- .''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield : :' : http://www.debian.org/ | `. `' | `- -- | signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Mon, 6 Dec 2004 10:32:14 +, Will Newton [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: On Monday 06 Dec 2004 10:01, Andrew Suffield wrote: The difference being that editing is a choice made by the person doing the work, while censorship is a choice made by an otherwise unrelated person in the same organisation. Editing would be if the maintainer decided to remove the package. Censorship is when some other developer tries to force him. I don't think this holds. Censoring is editing for ideological reasons, which is a subset of editing. It has nothing to do with who does it. A censor is a third party, and editor is a third party, at least in literary terms. Is removing legal material to protect the viewer from material that is deemed ideologically inappropriate by some considered editing for ideological reasons? manoj -- Like all women, she believed that rest and pleasure were bad for men. Fritz Leiber, _Swords and Ice Magic_ Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/ 1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Tue, 2004-12-07 at 20:31 +1100, Russell Coker wrote: On Tuesday 07 December 2004 11:22, Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 2004-12-07 at 10:01 +1100, Brian May wrote: So are you saying I should take my web pages of my naked dogs down? Depends on who's prurient interests are appealed to by your naked dogs. Fortunately, though, pictures of naked dogs are *not* considered to be appealing to prurient interests. Unless, *maybe*, a hyper- horny 13 year old boy is seeing a picture of dogs copulating, and not in the context of some scientific value, i.e., a text book. Even in that case, though, the boy would probably be told to wash his hand and stop being a pervert. So you have no objections to bestiality web sites then? How does a picture of dogs copulating get morphed into bestiality? Are you are purposefully misinterpreting what I wrote? [snip] -- - Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson, LA USA PGP Key ID 8834C06B I prefer encrypted mail. Fear the Penguin!! signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Tuesday 07 Dec 2004 20:26, Manoj Srivastava wrote: I don't think this holds. Censoring is editing for ideological reasons, which is a subset of editing. It has nothing to do with who does it. A censor is a third party, and editor is a third party, at least in literary terms. Is removing legal material to protect the viewer from material that is deemed ideologically inappropriate by some considered editing for ideological reasons? It may well be, it could also be editing in the interests of practicality. I'm not interested in sophistry. If you want to call it censorship call it that, I don't mind. But be aware that it is an emotionally charged word and using it pretty much destroys any chance of a reasoned debate.
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
Russell Coker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: So you have no objections to bestiality web sites then? The assumption here is that one must either have no objections, or else have objections and then proceed to object and want things removed. Perhaps I have misunderstood you, but there are many who hold such a view even if you do not, so it's worth addressing. I do have objections to hot-babe. I think it's degrading to people I care about. So I wouldn't package it. But that does *not* mean that I think nobody should be allowed to; my primary concern with respect to Debian is that we follow our actual policies, and if people want a new policy, they should make it the usual way. Debian can choose to publish hot-babe or not; either way I don't care much about it, except that I would not be willing to package it myself. Please don't paint me in a corner by saying that if someone is against prohibiting a package, it must be because they have no objections to it. As Manoj has pointed out, many of us have objections to vi also. Thomas
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
Il giorno mar, 07-12-2004 alle 18:37 +, Andrew Suffield ha scritto: This is not the case: one member of a community chooses to do something on which community doesn't agree. So community decides to not follow his member and *let him do what he wants by his own*. Debian should not do everything a single developer wants to do; as a community we have to find a general consensus on our policy. That's censorship. Know what you're advocating, and consider its implications. First: You need to understand that nobody stop you to do anything by your own. Make your debs and put in your homepage, take your responsibilities it's ok. This does not imply I can't press our community to exclude distributing that package (we've done the same thing in other cases) Second: Please justify what you say when reply. 2 again.
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
Russell == Russell Coker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Russell As an example see some of the books of advice for Russell pregnant women. They have LOTS of photos of nudity Russell including nipples and public hair. Women seem to buy Russell such books in quantity. From time to time they even have naked photos on broadcasted shows too. Sorry, I can't remember all the ratings now. I suspect one show was G (General), or similar (science show aimed at teenagers). What is scary is that I have all these nude photos on my website of some friends. Included is one bitch (hmmm... should include the other bitch sometime). No, I am not swearing (see dictionary reference for bitch if you are uncertain; in particular, see the K9 version). Should my website get censored? The subjects in question don't mind or understand... I think the issue, for the general case (some cultures may be different), isn't so much seeing the naked body is bad, rather, seeing pictures that present the body as a sex item is seen as bad. There is a fine line between the two, people will have different opinions. -- Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Mon, 2004-12-06 at 16:55 +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote: On Sun, Dec 05, 2004 at 09:53:00PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: Matthew Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Also, to the best my knowledge the kernel doesn't contain any pictures of naked people either. I might be mistaken. It does have language which qualifies as obscene. Not in the United States, at least, where obscene, as a matter of constitutional law, cannot describe text. Pfft, constitution. Like that'll ever hold up in court. Free Speech is not an absolute. For example, in most all of the US, if someone (especially an adult or teenager) yells out, Fuck you! in a playground full of younger children, and a policeman is nearby, the Sayer Of Foul Language could easily be hauled off. Circumstances that would make the Sayer more likely to be carted off would be the attitude of the policeman, whether a parent complains, or whether the yell was a one time offense, or whether it's a constant stream of off-color crudity. There was a case last year where a group of adults were floating down a river, making a constant, loud stream of crude comments. Just downstream was a couple of families with young children. A parent video-taped the scene, found a local sheriff, and the off- enders were arrested. The convictions were held up on appeal. -- - Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson, LA USA PGP Key ID 8834C06B I prefer encrypted mail. Sometime they'll give a war and nobody will come. Carl Sandburg Oh, come on. Sure they will. That's what testosterone is for... signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
6.12.2004 pisze Brian May ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): [...] Also, to the best my knowledge the kernel doesn't contain any pictures of naked people either. I might be mistaken. It is much, much worse. There is a picture of naked animal there. Jubal -- [ Miros/law L Baran, baran-at-knm-org-pl, neg IQ, cert AI ] [ 0101010 is ] [ BOF2510053411, makabra.knm.org.pl/~baran/, alchemy pany ] [ The Answer ] ,,Freund, es ist auch genug. Im Fall du mehr willst lesen, so geh und werde selbst die Schrift und selbst das Wesen.'' (Angelus Silesius)
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Mon, 2004-12-06 at 16:57 +1100, Brian May wrote: Russell == Russell Coker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Russell As an example see some of the books of advice for Russell pregnant women. They have LOTS of photos of nudity Russell including nipples and public hair. Women seem to buy Russell such books in quantity. From time to time they even have naked photos on broadcasted shows too. Sorry, I can't remember all the ratings now. I suspect one show was G (General), or similar (science show aimed at teenagers). What is scary is that I have all these nude photos on my website of some friends. Included is one bitch (hmmm... should include the other bitch sometime). No, I am not swearing (see dictionary reference for bitch if you are uncertain; in particular, see the K9 version). Should my website get censored? The subjects in question don't mind or understand... I think the issue, for the general case (some cultures may be different), isn't so much seeing the naked body is bad, rather, seeing pictures that present the body as a sex item is seen as bad. There is a fine line between the two, people will have different opinions. If you are presenting pictures that appeal to the prurient interest and lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value, then you very well might be violating your ISP's AUP. -- - Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson, LA USA PGP Key ID 8834C06B I prefer encrypted mail. In America, only the successful writer is important, in France all writers are important, in England no writer is important, and in Australia you have to explain what a writer is. Geoffrey Cottrell signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Sun, Dec 05, 2004 at 09:13:29PM -0600, Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No. We are not calling on the Morality Police to take the particular web site down. We are not saying, you can not install that app on your computer. There's a *fundamental* difference between don't want hot-babe in Debian and don't want hot-babe to *exist*. That doesn't contradict the fact that this could be considered stupid and/or hypocritic, while *not* censorship. Mike
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Mon, 2004-12-06 at 07:03 +0100, Miros/law Baran wrote: 6.12.2004 pisze Brian May ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): [...] Also, to the best my knowledge the kernel doesn't contain any pictures of naked people either. I might be mistaken. It is much, much worse. There is a picture of naked animal there. Ok, I'll bite: which file? -- - Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson, LA USA PGP Key ID 8834C06B I prefer encrypted mail. ACHTUNG - ALLES LOOKENPEEPERS Das Machine is nicht fur gefingerpoken und mittengrabben. Ist easy schnappen der springenwerk, blowenfusen und poppencorken mit spitzensparken. Ist nicht fur gewerken by das dummkopfen. Das rubbernecken sightseeren musten keepen das cotten-pickenen hands in das pockets - relaxen und watchen das blinkenlights. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 22:32:29 -0600, Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: On Sun, 2004-12-05 at 19:24 -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: There's a *fundamental* difference between don't want hot-babe in Debian and don't want hot-babe to *exist*. Currently, the procedures for the inclusion of packages in Debian allow each developer to decide what to package, provided the licenses permit distribution. Yes, I know. AFAICT, the only way for h-b to not be in Debian would be if Thibaut VARENE, who filed the original ITP, decided not to submit the package to Debian. That shall not work, since if the ITP is not followed upon, other people may chose to put the package in Debian. ITP's can be hijacked if the original author does not follow through. manoj -- NEWARK has been REZONED!! DES MOINES has been REZONED!! Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/ 1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 20:50:25 -0600, Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: On Sun, 2004-12-05 at 15:07 +, Andrew Suffield wrote: On Sun, Dec 05, 2004 at 08:45:56AM -0600, Steve Greenland wrote: On 05-Dec-04, 04:55 (CST), James Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There's no excuse for censorship, ever. Okay everybody, repeat after me: Choosing not to distribute a given package is NOT censorship. And telling somebody else that they can't distribute a given package IS censorship. You evidently have chosen not to do it. That's not censorship. You're presumably also trying to tell somebody else not to do it. That's censorship. Then the DFSG is censorship, and newspaper editors are censors. Be real, man. Steve Greenland said it perfectly: Choosing not to distribute a given package is NOT censorship. ... This is not a subtle difference. You choose not to put such a thing in Debian, your choice. You tell me that something I have worked upon, is legal, and free, and my work can't be put into debian because of your narrow morality, then it is indeed censorship. manoj -- What kind of sordid business are you on now? I mean, man, whither goest thou? Whither goest thou, America, in thy shiny car in the night? -- Jack Kerouac Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/ 1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Re: Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Mon, 2004-12-06 at 15:36 +0900, Mike Hommey wrote: On Sun, Dec 05, 2004 at 09:13:29PM -0600, Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No. We are not calling on the Morality Police to take the particular web site down. We are not saying, you can not install that app on your computer. There's a *fundamental* difference between don't want hot-babe in Debian and don't want hot-babe to *exist*. That doesn't contradict the fact that this could be considered stupid and/or hypocritic, while *not* censorship. True. Censorship and stupidity/hypocrisy are orthogonal. -- - Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson, LA USA PGP Key ID 8834C06B I prefer encrypted mail. The difference between RockRoll and Country Music? Old Rockers still on tour are pathetic, but old Country singers are still great. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Mon, 06 Dec 2004, Ron Johnson wrote: On Mon, 2004-12-06 at 07:03 +0100, Miros/law Baran wrote: 6.12.2004 pisze Brian May ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): Also, to the best my knowledge the kernel doesn't contain any pictures of naked people either. I might be mistaken. It is much, much worse. There is a picture of naked animal there. Ok, I'll bite: which file? Hell, it's even worse. We distribute a picture with a naked animal admonishing impressionable youngsters to imbibe! Upstream doesn't even stoop to our levels of depravity. Don Armstrong [Oh No! My signature may make those impressionable youngsters go out and get heavy water and start drinking radioactive coffee! And they won't know when to stop because their gieger counters won't start clicking because they haven't learned elementry particle physics!] -- UF: What's your favourite coffee blend? PD: Dark Crude with heavy water. You are understandink? If geiger counter does not click, the coffee, she is just not thick. http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 19:36:13 -0800, Bruce Perens [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: Maybe we should have such a process; maybe not. But regardless, the current process allows each individual developer that judgment. All Debian process is a result of having a problem, and not having a process. The problem in this case is that a lot of people think they know what's right, but have not walked through all of the implications and distilled it to process, and aren't interested in doing that work. I amnot sure setting up a process to censor packages is something the project should be interested in doing, no. manoj -- Argue for your limitations, and sure enough, they're yours. Messiah's Handbook : Reminders for the Advanced Soul Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/ 1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 17:27:39 -0800, Bruce Perens [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Steve Greenland wrote: Okay everybody, repeat after me: Choosing not to distribute a given package is NOT censorship. We are not telling people that they can't install, use, and/or distribute the package, just that we don't care to make it available as an official Debian package from our servers. This is not a subtle difference. Steve Agreed. We are obligated to respect your right of free speech. We aren't obligated to provide the venue for your speech. Who's we here, kemo sabe? Last I looked, you are not a project member. Now, Debian distributes legal, and free, programs that the members package. That has not changed. We do not block packages cause the contents are not to our liking. manoj -- Half a mind is a terrible thing to waste! Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/ 1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Sun, 5 Dec 2004 12:21:04 -0600, Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: On 05-Dec-04, 09:07 (CST), Andrew Suffield [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, Dec 05, 2004 at 08:45:56AM -0600, Steve Greenland wrote: On 05-Dec-04, 04:55 (CST), James Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There's no excuse for censorship, ever. Okay everybody, repeat after me: Choosing not to distribute a given package is NOT censorship. And telling somebody else that they can't distribute a given package IS censorship. I haven't told anyone that they can't distribute it. We, Debian, can choose not to distribute certain materials w/o it being censorship. We do not as a project decide to include or not include packages. The people who do the work decide what they work on. No one decided we should or should not have slat in the project. If I package a package, you do not have a right to tell me it shall not be included just because you do not like it. Either prove it is illegal, or it goes in. My local library does not buy and circulate every single book that comes on the market. That's not censorship. They have limited resources, and thus must make choices. The resources such a small package usees are the maintianers time -- and one that has been provided, rejecting a donated book because of the content would be censorship. manoj -- Don't worry about people stealing your ideas. If your ideas are any good, you'll have to ram them down people's throats. -- Howard Aiken Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/ 1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Sun, 5 Dec 2004 14:23:52 +0100, Jonas Meurer [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: On 05/12/2004 James Foster wrote: Pornography may be offensive to some. Is the package description for hot-babe accurate? Are people who do not want it installed being forced to install it? People who may be offended by the package should read its description and make up their own mind about whether or not they would like to install it. [...] There's no excuse for censorship, ever. so you would even accept nazi propaganda material in debian, just because you dislike censorship? Hell yes. I even tolerate KKK marches in town even though their stated cause is getting rid of people like me. Freedom is not just for ideas we approve of. did you ever think about the issue, that discriminating positions/POVs themselves are censoring, as they eliminate the thoughts of suppressed individuals? And have you tho=oiught that tolerating intolerance may be as repugnant to others? in my eyes there shouldn't be any tolerance for intolerance, as you woun't get respect in return. rather your tolerance will be exploited. Right. I am not about to go about tolerating people who are intolerant of artr, jsut because it celebrates the naked human body. manoj -- The more you speak of yourself, the more you are likely to lie. -- Zimmerman Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/ 1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Sun, 2004-12-05 at 22:49 -0800, Don Armstrong wrote: On Mon, 06 Dec 2004, Ron Johnson wrote: On Mon, 2004-12-06 at 07:03 +0100, Miros/law Baran wrote: 6.12.2004 pisze Brian May ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): Also, to the best my knowledge the kernel doesn't contain any pictures of naked people either. I might be mistaken. It is much, much worse. There is a picture of naked animal there. Ok, I'll bite: which file? Hell, it's even worse. We distribute a picture with a naked animal Umm, all animals (except humans) are naked. admonishing impressionable youngsters to imbibe! ??? I'm sure there's a picture somewhere of Tux drinking a beer. Which package is it in, just out of curiosity. Upstream doesn't even stoop to our levels of depravity. Certainly not to mine... :o -- - Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson, LA USA PGP Key ID 8834C06B I prefer encrypted mail. It is an unfortunate fact that we can secure peace only by preparing for war. John F Kennedy signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Sun, 5 Dec 2004 15:55:27 +, Matthew Garrett [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Hmm. Let it not be said that I don't respond in a fashion that the responded is likely to understand. Or, putting it another way: failing to include this piece of code does Debian no demonstrable harm. Including it does. I know we have something of a reputation for preferring philosophical masturbation to actually doing the useful thing, but that shouldn't result in a several hundred post flamewar. What are you all, stupid or something? No, moron, but you are. Let me try and express this in as few polysyllabic words as I can. Stupidly enough, you have committed the idiotic mistake of assuming that everyone holds to your premises, that firstly, tolerating intolerance is somehow a good thing -- why should it be is beyond me. Secondly, that giving in to the intolerant bigots is not going to hurt Debian -- it is going to hurt its reputation in enlightened circles, people who are against narrow minded bigotry, and wo recognize art --- even if Bruno Bellamy is not on their own preferred artists of the century list. Not permitting this package would be an indication that Debian has been overrun by art hating, narrow minded, right wing bigoted censors who are pursuing their agenda of imposing narrow minded so called morality on the rest of society. An, in case you do not get it, that is a bad thing. manoj -- I will make no bargains with terrorist hardware. Peter da Silva Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/ 1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Sun, 5 Dec 2004 22:57:19 +0100, Jan Ingvoldstad [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Here's one useful suggestion, I think: If hot-babe is useful as a .deb, make it available as such through its own web site or something. This works for many other packages not accepted into the Debian tree for whatever reason, why shouldn't it work for hot-babe? The reason other packages are not accepted into Debian is usually license issues -- they are not fre. Here we have a free package,m and the only reason to keep it out is narrow minded bigotry. I see that as a big deal. Or, if those of you who really really want hot-babe in a kind of distribution feel like it, create your own distribution tree with hot-babe and other stuff that's not regularly distributed in main, contrib, non-free or non-US. I'm sure there's enough interest around to make it popular. I have. This distribution has been called Debian. I make you the same offer: if you dislike freedom so much, make your own distro. Good luck. manoj -- She blinded me with science! Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/ 1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Mon, 2004-12-06 at 00:39 -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote: On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 22:32:29 -0600, Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: On Sun, 2004-12-05 at 19:24 -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: There's a *fundamental* difference between don't want hot-babe in Debian and don't want hot-babe to *exist*. Currently, the procedures for the inclusion of packages in Debian allow each developer to decide what to package, provided the licenses permit distribution. Yes, I know. AFAICT, the only way for h-b to not be in Debian would be if Thibaut VARENE, who filed the original ITP, decided not to submit the package to Debian. That shall not work, since if the ITP is not followed upon, other people may chose to put the package in Debian. ITP's can be hijacked if the original author does not follow through. Picky, picky. You get my point, though. But probably not. -- - Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson, LA USA PGP Key ID 8834C06B I prefer encrypted mail. One sword keeps another in the sheath. George Herbert signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Mon, 2004-12-06 at 00:57 -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote: On Sun, 5 Dec 2004 22:57:19 +0100, Jan Ingvoldstad [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Here's one useful suggestion, I think: If hot-babe is useful as a .deb, make it available as such through its own web site or something. This works for many other packages not accepted into the Debian tree for whatever reason, why shouldn't it work for hot-babe? The reason other packages are not accepted into Debian is usually license issues -- they are not fre. But that's censorship! -- - Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson, LA USA PGP Key ID 8834C06B I prefer encrypted mail. All machines, no matter how complex, are considered to be based on 6 simple elements: the lever, the pulley, the wheel and axle, the screw, the wedge and the inclined plane. Marilyn Vos Savant signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Mon, 2004-12-06 at 00:38 -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote: On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 20:50:25 -0600, Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: On Sun, 2004-12-05 at 15:07 +, Andrew Suffield wrote: On Sun, Dec 05, 2004 at 08:45:56AM -0600, Steve Greenland wrote: On 05-Dec-04, 04:55 (CST), James Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There's no excuse for censorship, ever. Okay everybody, repeat after me: Choosing not to distribute a given package is NOT censorship. And telling somebody else that they can't distribute a given package IS censorship. You evidently have chosen not to do it. That's not censorship. You're presumably also trying to tell somebody else not to do it. That's censorship. Then the DFSG is censorship, and newspaper editors are censors. Be real, man. Steve Greenland said it perfectly: Choosing not to distribute a given package is NOT censorship. ... This is not a subtle difference. You choose not to put such a thing in Debian, your choice. You tell me that something I have worked upon, is legal, and free, and my work can't be put into debian because of your narrow morality, then it is indeed censorship. Sigh I never said it *can't*. The tone has been, *should* it be in Debian. -- - Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson, LA USA PGP Key ID 8834C06B I prefer encrypted mail. I have been assured by a very knowing American of my acquaintance in London, that a young healthy child well nursed is at a year old a most delicious, nourishing, and wholesome food, whether stewed, roasted, baked, or boiled; and I make no doubt that it will equally serve in a fricassee or a ragout. A MODEST PROPOSAL FOR PREVENTING THE CHILDREN OF POOR PEOPLE IN IRELAND FROM BEING A BURDEN TO THEIR PARENTS OR COUNTRY signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Mon, 06 Dec 2004 00:45:20 -0600, Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: On Mon, 2004-12-06 at 15:36 +0900, Mike Hommey wrote: On Sun, Dec 05, 2004 at 09:13:29PM -0600, Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No. We are not calling on the Morality Police to take the particular web site down. We are not saying, you can not install that app on your computer. There's a *fundamental* difference between don't want hot-babe in Debian and don't want hot-babe to *exist*. That doesn't contradict the fact that this could be considered stupid and/or hypocritic, while *not* censorship. True. Censorship and stupidity/hypocrisy are orthogonal. You have got to be kidding. Or you do not understand the meaning of the word orthogonal. manoj -- He'll sit here and he'll say, Do this! Do that! And nothing will happen. Harry S. Truman, on presidential power Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/ 1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Mon, 06 Dec 2004 01:08:31 -0600, Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: On Mon, 2004-12-06 at 00:57 -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote: On Sun, 5 Dec 2004 22:57:19 +0100, Jan Ingvoldstad [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Here's one useful suggestion, I think: If hot-babe is useful as a .deb, make it available as such through its own web site or something. This works for many other packages not accepted into the Debian tree for whatever reason, why shouldn't it work for hot-babe? The reason other packages are not accepted into Debian is usually license issues -- they are not fre. But that's censorship! No, dear idiot, it is not. We do not distribute illegal software, cause we are not scofflaws. We do not distribute non--free stuff, cause that is the core of what we are. And if no DD does the work, it is not here to be distributed. We do not censor based on content. I don't know why I bother explaining all this. manoj -- Nuclear war would really set back cable. Ted Turner Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/ 1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Mon, 06 Dec 2004 01:07:32 -0600, Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: On Mon, 2004-12-06 at 00:39 -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote: On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 22:32:29 -0600, Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: On Sun, 2004-12-05 at 19:24 -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: There's a *fundamental* difference between don't want hot-babe in Debian and don't want hot-babe to *exist*. Currently, the procedures for the inclusion of packages in Debian allow each developer to decide what to package, provided the licenses permit distribution. Yes, I know. AFAICT, the only way for h-b to not be in Debian would be if Thibaut VARENE, who filed the original ITP, decided not to submit the package to Debian. That shall not work, since if the ITP is not followed upon, other people may chose to put the package in Debian. ITP's can be hijacked if the original author does not follow through. Picky, picky. You get my point, though. But probably not. No, what is your point? Just convincing the original ITP filer is not enough. That was my point. manoj -- I took a fish head to the movies and I didn't have to pay. Fish Heads, Saturday Night Live, 1977. Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/ 1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Mon, 2004-12-06 at 01:18 -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote: On Mon, 06 Dec 2004 01:08:31 -0600, Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: On Mon, 2004-12-06 at 00:57 -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote: On Sun, 5 Dec 2004 22:57:19 +0100, Jan Ingvoldstad [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Here's one useful suggestion, I think: If hot-babe is useful as a .deb, make it available as such through its own web site or something. This works for many other packages not accepted into the Debian tree for whatever reason, why shouldn't it work for hot-babe? The reason other packages are not accepted into Debian is usually license issues -- they are not fre. But that's censorship! No, dear idiot, it is not. We do not distribute illegal software, cause we are not scofflaws. We do not distribute non--free stuff, cause that is the core of what we are. And if no DD does the work, it is not here to be distributed. We do not censor based on content. Legal, illegal, what's the difference? *I* want to package it. Therefore, anyone who tries to stop me is censoring me. -- - Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson, LA USA PGP Key ID 8834C06B I prefer encrypted mail. Experience should teach us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the Government's purposes are beneficent. Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning, but without understanding. Justice Louis Brandeis, dissenting, Olmstead v US (1928) signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
Ron Johnson wrote: Legal, illegal, what's the difference? *I* want to package it. Therefore, anyone who tries to stop me is censoring me. Nobody can stop you from creating a package of it. Folks on the Debian project can collectively decide whether or not the project should be a party to distributing it. Thanks Bruce smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
Bruce Perens [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Nobody can stop you from creating a package of it. Folks on the Debian project can collectively decide whether or not the project should be a party to distributing it. Currently the only procedure we have in place for this, short of convincing the maintainer to withdraw it, is a GR. So while you are right, your attempts to pretend that there is some other sort of procedure, or perhaps to pressure people to act as if there were one, is unwelcome. And, IIRC, you aren't one of those folks anyway, right?
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Sun, 2004-12-05 at 23:44 -0800, Bruce Perens wrote: Ron Johnson wrote: Legal, illegal, what's the difference? *I* want to package it. Therefore, anyone who tries to stop me is censoring me. Nobody can stop you from creating a package of it. Folks on the Debian project can collectively decide whether or not the project should be a party to distributing it. Yes. I was trying to make a point by taking Manoj's censorship article to the extreme. -- - Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson, LA USA PGP Key ID 8834C06B I prefer encrypted mail. One sword keeps another in the sheath. George Herbert signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
Manoj Srivastava wrote: Who's we here, kemo sabe? Last I looked, you are not a project member. You haven't looked in a while. Bruce smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: Currently the only procedure we have in place for this, short of convincing the maintainer to withdraw it, is a GR. Yes, I will work on that. And, IIRC, you aren't one of those folks anyway, right? No, that's wrong. I was added to the active Debian developer keyring more than 11 months ago and meet all necessary qualifications of a Debian developer. Thanks Bruce smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Monday 06 December 2004 08:01, Ron Johnson wrote: On Sun, 2004-12-05 at 22:49 -0800, Don Armstrong wrote: Umm, all animals (except humans) are naked. :-O and here I always thought I was naked underneed my clothes! -- Cheers, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis) 1. Encrypted mail preferred (GPG KeyID: 0x86624ABB) 2. Plain-text mail recommended since I move html and double format mails to a low priority folder (they're mainly spam) pgp4kLzgsijAn.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: Nobody can stop you from creating a package of it. Folks on the Debian project can collectively decide whether or not the project should be a party to distributing it. Currently the only procedure we have in place for this, short of convincing the maintainer to withdraw it, is a GR. Well, except for.. 1. package is rejected by ftp-masters for whatever reason they feel like or simply left to rot in Incoming forever (mplayer) 2. DPL[1] asks ftp-master to remove a package 3. project decides to relegate a class of packages to an alternate repository (non-us) 4. maintainer is removed from Debian project for any of the reasons listed in the DMUP, or any other reason, and package is removed/rejected then or later due to lack of maintainer 5. project decides informally that a class of software is not in scope for the distribution (all DFSG free windows-only or macos-only software) 6. project decides informally that potential legal liabilities outweigh the benefit of putting some software in Debian, applies this on a slightly ad-hoc basis (certian possibly-patent-infringing software, but hardly all of it) 7. content of package referred to tech committee, who overrule the maintainer[2] 8. black helicopters 9. we all end up wanking in this thread forever whilst being titillated by ubuntu, never release again, and so the point is moot Hmm, no GRs there. My personal bets for the case that spawned this thread: 1, 6, 5, or 8^W9. -- see shy jo [1] I hesitate to provide constitutional cites because it's like spreading blood in the water, but depending on the situation, this could easily be allowed under 5.1.3, 5.1.1, or 5.1.4. Or just see #1 above and consider who has oversight. [2] That's 6.1.4 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Well, except for.. I'm sorry, I didn't mean that these other possibilities don't exist. Bruce was not suggesting any of them either, and my real point is that none of them are on-topic for debian-devel. 6. project decides informally that potential legal liabilities outweigh the benefit of putting some software in Debian, applies this on a slightly ad-hoc basis (certian possibly-patent-infringing software, but hardly all of it) I don't know what in practice this amounts to, except the ftp-masters or the DPL enforcing it, which reduces to the previous things. 7. content of package referred to tech committee, who overrule the maintainer[2] tech-ctte has no jurisdiction over non-technical matters.
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Sun, Dec 05, 2004 at 09:06:00PM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote: What is actually happening here is that one individual Debian developer is choosing to distribute a given package, and some other developers are trying to stop them. That's censorship. Even if they don't have the authority to do it (that just makes it ineffective censorship). Actually, the developer is choosing to have Debian distribute a package, and others are trying to stop Debian from distributing the package. Word games. Censorship is when a citizen of one body chooses to have that body distribute something (by being a citizen and distributing it), and another citizen tries to stop them. Gah! Book publishers do not publish every manuscript that is sent to them. Movie studios do not fund every screenplay sent to them. Libraries, as has been mentioned before, don't buy every book. You seem to be suggesting that any case where an organisation doesn't publish something is not censorship. That's obviously wrong, because some of them *are* censorship. Such choices are made *all the time*. It's the difference between editing and censoring. The difference being that editing is a choice made by the person doing the work, while censorship is a choice made by an otherwise unrelated person in the same organisation. Editing would be if the maintainer decided to remove the package. Censorship is when some other developer tries to force him. -- .''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield : :' : http://www.debian.org/ | `. `' | `- -- | signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Monday 06 Dec 2004 06:54, Manoj Srivastava wrote: Stupidly enough, you have committed the idiotic mistake of assuming that everyone holds to your premises, that firstly, tolerating intolerance is somehow a good thing -- why should it be is beyond me. Oh, this is about intolerance is it? I thought it was about whether a rather pointless, possibly illegal to distribute bit of light entertainment that is widely held to be offensive is really a worthy addition to the universal operating system. Secondly, that giving in to the intolerant bigots is not going to hurt Debian -- it is going to hurt its reputation in enlightened circles, people who are against narrow minded bigotry, and wo recognize art --- even if Bruno Bellamy is not on their own preferred artists of the century list. Also porn fiends might be disappointed. Not permitting this package would be an indication that Debian has been overrun by art hating, narrow minded, right wing bigoted censors who are pursuing their agenda of imposing narrow minded so called morality on the rest of society. Art hating? Narrow minded? WTF? This is an operating system not an art gallery and no-one is suggesting censoring anyone.
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Monday 06 Dec 2004 10:01, Andrew Suffield wrote: The difference being that editing is a choice made by the person doing the work, while censorship is a choice made by an otherwise unrelated person in the same organisation. Editing would be if the maintainer decided to remove the package. Censorship is when some other developer tries to force him. I don't think this holds. Censoring is editing for ideological reasons, which is a subset of editing. It has nothing to do with who does it. A censor is a third party, and editor is a third party, at least in literary terms. Arguing about the difference is IMO word games.
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Mon, Dec 06, 2004 at 10:01:16AM +, Andrew Suffield wrote: Actually, the developer is choosing to have Debian distribute a package, and others are trying to stop Debian from distributing the package. Word games. Censorship is when a citizen of one body chooses to have that body distribute something (by being a citizen and distributing it), and another citizen tries to stop them. Gah! Book publishers do not publish every manuscript that is sent to them. Movie studios do not fund every screenplay sent to them. Libraries, as has been mentioned before, don't buy every book. You seem to be suggesting that any case where an organisation doesn't publish something is not censorship. That's obviously wrong, because some of them *are* censorship. Such choices are made *all the time*. It's the difference between editing and censoring. The difference being that editing is a choice made by the person doing the work, while censorship is a choice made by an otherwise unrelated person in the same organisation. Editing would be if the maintainer decided to remove the package. Censorship is when some other developer tries to force him. If an ftp-master in the course of doing the work of processing NEW rejects a package, or a member of the release team in the course of doing the work of preparing the next stable release excludes a package from consideration, is this editing, or is it censorship? If they do so for legal reasons? If they do so for technical reasons? If they do so because, in their estimation, doing so improves the quality of the distribution? Publishing houses never let writers edit their own work -- at least until they're famous and have mindless followers who'll buy and read any formulaic tripe they slap together. I don't think I like the idea of Debian becoming the Stephen King of the Open Source world. It's extremely frustrating to see so many words spent on the notion of censorship here. At the end of the day, Debian, *as an organization*, has the right (and responsibility) to decide what it publishes on behalf of its member developers, and doing so is *not* *censorship*. Even if that happens to mean adopting policies that some significant minority fraction of the developership disagrees with. It's no wonder that Debian has a hard time reaching any sort of consensus these days when we have developers who are happy as a pig in mud to argue ad infinitum about whether the project has a right to *exercise* consensus. And it's no wonder that Debian is slow to release when people are criticized on public lists for showing an interest in the contents and quality of packages that aren't theirs; for daring to ask the question, is this something that Debian needs? I've seen people make comments in this thread that hot-babe is just one more package among thousands, and that uploading it doesn't mean integrating it with the OS. I think this attitude lies at the heart of one of Debian's biggest problems today, namely that far too many developers seem to look on Debian as nothing more than a package pool instead of as an OS. I'm sorry, but package pool has been done before -- it's called rpmfind.net, I've lived it, and it sucked. That's not what I'm after as a member of this project, and I hope it's not what most other developers are after either, but making an OS instead of a package pool takes developers who are willing to look at issues outside the narrow confines of their own packages. It means looking precisely *towards* questions of better integration between packages, to provide something cohesively whole. Sometimes, it means asking yourself that hard question, does my pet package, the 24th app in class foo, make Debian a better OS, or is there some other way I could be contributing that would improve the quality of Debian for everyone? This discussion shouldn't be about censorship, or other forms of coercion; no one with anything remotely resembling the power to do so has actually suggested suppressing this package. It shouldn't be about legality; there's scant little evidence that cartoon drawings of naked breasts are illegal in any jurisdiction where Debian wouldn't already have serious problems. What it *should* be about is moving towards a consensus, *together with the maintainer*[1], about what we want Debian to be. And contrary to much of the rhetoric in this thread, it is possible to think a package like hot-babe is a bad idea without wanting to be set up as a censor for all ideas they disagree with. ObRC: 283476 -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer [1] Did anyone else notice that none of the people carrying on in this thread is the ITPer, and very few of the messages are actually addressed towards him? signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On 06/12/2004 Manoj Srivastava wrote: in my eyes there shouldn't be any tolerance for intolerance, as you woun't get respect in return. rather your tolerance will be exploited. Right. I am not about to go about tolerating people who are intolerant of artr, jsut because it celebrates the naked human body. right, this is finally not the problem i meant when using the expression 'sexism'. if we really want a result in this discussion, we should start with differentiate between symptoms and causes. the celebration of naked human bodies is definitely not sexism itself, the latent discrimination of women in the society is sexism. anyway all these topics are connected in most societies, as most societies on earth accept (and go on with) partiarchy. objections against the hot-babe package are only a cause of this problem ... bye jonas
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On 06/12/2004 Steve Langasek wrote: Publishing houses never let writers edit their own work -- at least until they're famous and have mindless followers who'll buy and read any formulaic tripe they slap together. I don't think I like the idea of Debian becoming the Stephen King of the Open Source world. then we should reconsider the Social Contract and the GR, as these claim data to be software in our (debians) point of view. i personally always disliked the idea of all data in debian being software, as there are to many grey areas about that topic. bye jonas signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: I'm sorry, I didn't mean that these other possibilities don't exist. So why are you muttering about GRs when at least 9 other avenues exist and GRs are proven to be divisive and a waste of time? Bruce was not suggesting any of them either, and my real point is that none of them are on-topic for debian-devel. Discussion of 3, 5, 7 are all strictly on topic for this mailing list. I don't know what in practice this amounts to, except the ftp-masters or the DPL enforcing it, which reduces to the previous things. Take a look at ITPs for things that infringe on the client-side rsync patent. tech-ctte has no jurisdiction over non-technical matters. It can be phrased as a technical matter. -- see shy jo signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Fri, Dec 03, 2004 at 12:12:53PM +0900, Mike Hommey wrote: You're being offensive, you should not be included in Debian. Reading this one comment made this whole craptacular thread worth reading. - David Nusinow
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
Il giorno lun, 06-12-2004 alle 01:49 +, Andrew Suffield ha scritto: Word games. Censorship is when a citizen of one body chooses to have that body distribute something (by being a citizen and distributing it), and another citizen tries to stop them. This is not the case: one member of a community chooses to do something on which community doesn't agree. So community decides to not follow his member and *let him do what he wants by his own*. Debian should not do everything a single developer wants to do; as a community we have to find a general consensus on our policy. If we think that some action (like packaging sexist material) is offensive for out principles (yes, me may have more principles other free software) we can decide to try to stop that action. Debian is a community not just a set of independent members (at least this is what i'll like it to be) my just 2 cents for my very first post :-)
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Mon, 2004-12-06 at 21:25 +0100, Andrea Bedini wrote: Il giorno lun, 06-12-2004 alle 01:49 +, Andrew Suffield ha scritto: Word games. Censorship is when a citizen of one body chooses to have that body distribute something (by being a citizen and distributing it), and another citizen tries to stop them. This is not the case: one member of a community chooses to do something on which community doesn't agree. So community decides to not follow his member and *let him do what he wants by his own*. Debian should not do everything a single developer wants to do; as a community we have to find a general consensus on our policy. If we think that some action (like packaging sexist material) is offensive for out principles (yes, me may have more principles other free software) we can decide to try to stop that action. Debian is a community not just a set of independent members (at least this is what i'll like it to be) my just 2 cents for my very first post :-) And a very well-said one, at that. -- - Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson, LA USA PGP Key ID 8834C06B I prefer encrypted mail. The political implications of this picture are pretty amazing. http://www-1.ibm.com/ibm/history/exhibits/waywewore/waywewore_28. html signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
Ron == Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Ron Umm, all animals (except humans) are naked. Not true; have a look at some of the photos here: URL:http://www.tech-sol.net/humor/funphoto121.htm (note: web page produces stupid warnings; ignore them and it seems to work). There probably are better photos if you looked. While some photos are rather erotic (unfortunately), there are some very decent photos, too. -- Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
Ron == Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Ron If you are presenting pictures that appeal to the prurient Ron interest and lacks serious literary, artistic, political or Ron scientific value, then you very well might be violating your Ron ISP's AUP. So are you saying I should take my web pages of my naked dogs down? -- Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Tue, 2004-12-07 at 10:01 +1100, Brian May wrote: Ron == Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Ron If you are presenting pictures that appeal to the prurient Ron interest and lacks serious literary, artistic, political or Ron scientific value, then you very well might be violating your Ron ISP's AUP. So are you saying I should take my web pages of my naked dogs down? Depends on who's prurient interests are appealed to by your naked dogs. Fortunately, though, pictures of naked dogs are *not* considered to be appealing to prurient interests. Unless, *maybe*, a hyper- horny 13 year old boy is seeing a picture of dogs copulating, and not in the context of some scientific value, i.e., a text book. Even in that case, though, the boy would probably be told to wash his hand and stop being a pervert. -- - Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson, LA USA PGP Key ID 8834C06B I prefer encrypted mail. Americans hate foreign policy because Americans hate foreigners, because they *are* foreigners, and came to this country to get away from the bad things. P.J. O'rourke, 2004-06-25, Fox News Channel signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Mon, Dec 06, 2004 at 04:13:08PM +0100, Jonas Meurer wrote: On 06/12/2004 Steve Langasek wrote: Publishing houses never let writers edit their own work -- at least until they're famous and have mindless followers who'll buy and read any formulaic tripe they slap together. I don't think I like the idea of Debian becoming the Stephen King of the Open Source world. then we should reconsider the Social Contract and the GR, as these claim data to be software in our (debians) point of view. i personally always disliked the idea of all data in debian being software, as there are to many grey areas about that topic. And the award for greatest disjoint between mail and reply goes to Jonas Meurer. Other awards for this post include best hijacking of an unrelated thread to reignite dead topics, and The Non-sequitur award for cognative dissonance. - Matt signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Tue, Dec 07, 2004 at 11:21:41AM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote: On Mon, Dec 06, 2004 at 04:13:08PM +0100, Jonas Meurer wrote: On 06/12/2004 Steve Langasek wrote: Publishing houses never let writers edit their own work -- at least until they're famous and have mindless followers who'll buy and read any formulaic tripe they slap together. I don't think I like the idea of Debian becoming the Stephen King of the Open Source world. then we should reconsider the Social Contract and the GR, as these claim data to be software in our (debians) point of view. i personally always disliked the idea of all data in debian being software, as there are to many grey areas about that topic. And the award for greatest disjoint between mail and reply goes to Jonas Meurer. Other awards for this post include best hijacking of an unrelated thread to reignite dead topics, and The Non-sequitur award for cognative dissonance. But JACK HOWARTH IS A FUCKING IDIOT ... -- Glenn Maynard
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 12/03/2004 12:08 PM, Mike Hommey wrote: On Fri, Dec 03, 2004 at 01:26:50AM +0100, Michelle Konzack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Am 2004-12-02 18:11:03, schrieb Manoj Srivastava: The Bible is illegal to distribute in the most populous nation in the world. Not only this, because the Old Testament glorifies the genocide... The Thora too. But not the Quran :-) True, the Koran just invites to kill your ennemy bloodily, that's very different... Thats wrong, thats just an interpretion. - -- [ Clemens Schwaighofer -=:~ ] [ TBWA\ TEQUILA\ Japan IT Group ] [6-17-2 Ginza Chuo-ku, Tokyo 104-0061, JAPAN ] [ Tel: +81-(0)3-3545-7703Fax: +81-(0)3-3545-7343 ] [ http://www.tequila.co.jphttp://www.tbwajapan.co.jp ] -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFBtSwzjBz/yQjBxz8RAlvPAJ0XLkF3WohLGKuVvRPvVDX5Go3epgCfccJ7 c2kRmbmgFJfzIQ0K9Ci29jg= =8jNG -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
Pornography may be offensive to some. Is the package description for hot-babe accurate? Are people who do not want it installed being forced to install it? People who may be offended by the package should read its description and make up their own mind about whether or not they would like to install it. I'd like to also mention that censorship is very offensive, to me. I find it absolutely disgusting that some people think they have the right to control what I may view, or what gets included in media (Debian, in this case) that I use, due to their own beliefs. If they are offended by something, and they are not being forced to expose themselves to it, they have no good reason for complaint, and they especially shouldn't try to stop other people from viewing/using it. As for legal issues, there's so much software and so many packages in Debian, that it's more or less impossible to keep track of which packages violate which laws, and in which countries those laws apply. It'd be nice if that were possible, but it's not. I imagine most packages might violate some obscure law in some obscure country. Debian needs to stick to the laws of one major country, and perhaps provide packages that don't fit into that country's legal system as a separate source, if possible. I live in Australia, but I think that basing Debians decisions on US law is the most sensible option. Which packages should be allowed into Debian? All packages with a maintainer. This policy could lead to problems with Debian growing far too large. To solve that, I feel there should be some discussion on packages that might not be very useful to many people. If it is decided that they're probably not very useful, they should be put into a separate source, outside the main distribution, but still available for those that want them. There's no excuse for censorship, ever.
Re: Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On 05/12/2004 James Foster wrote: Pornography may be offensive to some. Is the package description for hot-babe accurate? Are people who do not want it installed being forced to install it? People who may be offended by the package should read its description and make up their own mind about whether or not they would like to install it. [...] There's no excuse for censorship, ever. so you would even accept nazi propaganda material in debian, just because you dislike censorship? did you ever think about the issue, that discriminating positions/POVs themselves are censoring, as they eliminate the thoughts of suppressed individuals? in my eyes there shouldn't be any tolerance for intolerance, as you woun't get respect in return. rather your tolerance will be exploited. and apart from that, i don't need a gender war in debian. nearly every community i know, online or reallife, ran into sexist problems sooner or later, caused by latent disriminating structures in modern societies. bye jonas
Re: Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
Le dimanche 05 décembre 2004 à 14:23 +0100, Jonas Meurer a écrit : There's no excuse for censorship, ever. so you would even accept nazi propaganda material in debian, just because you dislike censorship? You're being late for invoking the Godwin law. -- .''`. Josselin Mouette/\./\ : :' : [EMAIL PROTECTED] `. `'[EMAIL PROTECTED] `- Debian GNU/Linux -- The power of freedom signature.asc Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=
Re: Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On 05/12/2004 Josselin Mouette wrote: Le dimanche 05 décembre 2004 à 14:23 +0100, Jonas Meurer a écrit : There's no excuse for censorship, ever. so you would even accept nazi propaganda material in debian, just because you dislike censorship? You're being late for invoking the Godwin law. can you give further information about this 'Godwin law'? you mean that i repeated what Godwin already mentioned? bye jonas signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
[Jonas Meurer] can you give further information about this 'Godwin law'? you mean that i repeated what Godwin already mentioned? Different Godwin, I believe. URL:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
* Jonas Meurer wrote: can you give further information about this 'Godwin law'? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwins_law Sebastian -- PGP-Key: http://www.mmweg.rwth-aachen.de/~sebastian.ley/public.key Fingerprint: A46A 753F AEDC 2C01 BE6E F6DB 97E0 3309 9FD6 E3E6
Re: Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Sun, 2004-12-05 at 14:29 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote: Le dimanche 05 décembre 2004 à 14:23 +0100, Jonas Meurer a écrit : There's no excuse for censorship, ever. so you would even accept nazi propaganda material in debian, just because you dislike censorship? You're being late for invoking the Godwin law. In order to keep the conversation going, let's rephrase that to: so you would even accept vil sexist/racist/homophobic/globalist baby-eating Republican propaganda material. -- - Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson, LA USA PGP Key ID 8834C06B I prefer encrypted mail. The one function that TV news performs very well is that when there is no news we give it to you with the same emphasis as if it were. David Brinkley signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
