Re: Please be respectful

[Leslie Rhorer]

On 10/26/2020 6:15 PM, Long Wind wrote:



On Saturday, October 24, 2020, 6:35:17 AM EDT, Leslie Rhorer 
 wrote:





   “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to
do nothing.”― Edmund Burke

     In my opinion, the *LAST* thing one should do is keep quiet.


rude user won't be victorious, list moderator can easily expel them


	You seem to have an odd definition of "victory".  Ignoring someone does 
not represent a victory on the part of the one doing the ignoring nor a 
loss on the one ignored.  Picking up one's football and going home does 
not win the ballgame.


	Not only that, once again I challenge you to point to a single post of 
mine that was rude.

Re: Please be respectful

[Leslie Rhorer]

On 10/24/2020 3:11 PM, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote:

Leslie,

You clearly have a great deal to say about your personal morals and ethics


	Not really, no.  Certainly not by comparison to the volume of my daily 
work.  "A great deal to say" would encompass volumes.  I tyed a fe lines.



and you do not regard yourself as anybody's fool.


	Hmm.  I am an engineer, which means I am a professional idiot.  Whether 
I am a fool or not, I really don't know.  That is for others to say.



"Never argue with a fool on the Internet - after a couple of rounds, a dispassionate 
observer will not be able to tell who's who"


	Perhaps.  I have been doing this a very long time; far, far longer than 
there has been an internet, or a public one, anyway.  Except when I am 
wrong - which happens often enough - I have rarely lost a debate in any 
online forum.  Whether that is a good or bad thing, I don't know.



Your responses in this and other threads are neither necessarily constructive


	When I give my professional advice, I submit they are always 
constructive.  When I offer a personal opinion outside my expertise as 
an engineer, I see no reason why the post should be construed as 
constructive or otherwise.  They are simply accurate to the best of my 
ability to make them.  An opinion is an opinion.  "Constructive" is not 
an adjective that applies in any meaningful way.  I will offer and 
defend my opinions - nothing more or less.



nor helping other people to appreciate you more widely.


	Why would I wish to be appreciated at all, let alone widely?  I assure 
you I have absolutely no desire to win a popularity contest.  I despise 
those who seek adulation, and I am not looking for praise.  If something 
I say is helpful, then fine.  I don't mind, but I don't want anyone to 
think they should be grateful.  I speak the truth as my experience has 
led me to surmise it to be irrespective of how I might be perceived.



I would respectfully suggest that you could profitably go back and read the 
list archives to find examples of good and useful


	In the more than 40 years I have been communicating in fora similar to 
this I have seen just about every communication style imaginable.  It 
would be an absolute deception for me to try to adopt a style - probably 
one abhorrent to me - merely to achieve some end in which I have no 
interest in the first place.  That is not to say my communication style 
is any better than anyone else's, but it is mine, and I am not about to 
steal, as it were, someone else's.  What it would profit me totally 
escapes me.



communication styles that will allow you to bring your expertise to bear more 
usefully to every reader's benefit.


	If someone wants me to be useful, they need to pay me.  That is what I 
do for a living.  This thread is not about anyone's expertise or bring 
useful.  It is about opinions concerning being polite.



The Debian mailing list code of conduct (see below) is here to try and bring 
some of these things more clearly to people's attention


	I have to call BS on this.  No matter the putative intent, rules are 
almost universally created as a means of making the rule maker(s) feel 
important or empowered.  Even in the very few cases where this is not 
true, virtually no rules ever succeed in producing the stated intent. 
Control of that nature is an illusion.  Very, very few people understand 
enough about natural processes to produce effective rulesets where 
intelligence and creativity are involved.  It is difficult enough with 
computers.



The Debian Code of Conduct (see below) is more wide ranging and applies to any 
and all Debian assets. In many ways, it's based on
getting the best out of how we work:


	Then why is it Debian continues to go down the figurative toilet?  It 
used to be moderately decent.  Year after year after year the best 
attributes of the distro have been tossed in the garbage so that now it 
is a pile of ridiculous junk.  Actually, it is in great measure because 
of those rules it is now almost junk.  Fifteen years ago, it was a 
half-way decent product.  I did not have to search too long to find 
quite a few decent features of the distro.  Now I am hard pressed to 
find a single one that was not better in previous releases.


	I respectfully suggest the Debian rules be trashed in their entirety, 
eliminate the bunch of egos driving the projects, and get some people 
who don't care about their own self-importance.  The rules are not 
working.  Rules almost never do.  Point to innovation and excellence, 
and I will show you a rule breaker.



we're aware of the sorts of issues that can cause problems or attitudes that 
can alienate
people and would not wish to perpetuate these.


	Please quit worrying about alienating people.  Quit worrying about 
"feelings".  This is an Operating System, not an episode of Mister 
Roger's Neighborhood.  Above all, please quit trying to be a popular OS. 
 Leave that to Windows or Ubuntu.



With thanks

Re: Please be respectful

[Long Wind]

 

On Saturday, October 24, 2020, 6:35:17 AM EDT, Leslie Rhorer 
 wrote: 



  “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to 
do nothing.”― Edmund Burke

    In my opinion, the *LAST* thing one should do is keep quiet.

rude user won't be victorious, list moderator can easily expel them  
  

Re: Please be respectful

[Leslie Rhorer]

On 10/26/2020 7:59 AM, Andrei POPESCU wrote:


I'm quite certain at least part of this huge discussion is caused by
misunderstandings.


That is fairly clear.


This is my attempt to clarify at least some of it.

Apparently I failed.


	Well, in my case I don't think I failed to understand very much.  I 
could be wrong.  I am (always) happy for anyone to point out what I 
misunderstood.


	Don't beat yourself up, though.  Failure is not to be feared.  It 
should be embraced and used as a means to grow.

Re: Please be respectful

[Leslie Rhorer]

On 10/26/2020 8:50 AM, Joe wrote:


It's all a bit subjective. As I understand things, a stranger deserves


	It is entirely subjective.  Whatever is or is not polite is not only a 
matter of perspective, it is also a matter of the situation and the 
relationships of the people involved.  When I say to a close friend, 
"You are such an idiot!", it may or may not be at all disrespectful. 
The term "polite" has little or no meaning in such a context.  Certainly 
nothing can be taken from the words themselves



politeness, and also a default value of respect, which as Leslie says,
is worth nothing as it applies to every stranger.


	Indeed.  IMO, being polite as a matter of habit is nothing more than 
good manners, and it means nothing at all in terms of the person being 
addressed.  Politeness in and of itself can imply an extremely high 
level of disrespect.



Genuine, higher-than-default respect can only be earned, but politeness
should always be maintained, even in the face of rudeness.


	I would mostly agree with that.  One must judge each and every 
situation in its own context and on its own merits, or one is doomed to 
failure.  This is one reason - one of many, many reasons - why concrete 
rules are so utterly worthless.  Aside from the fact they are based upon 
the ego of some individual of indeterminate capabilities, they are an 
attempt at a one-size-fits-all solution to problems that do not exist at 
the time the rules where penned.  The fact is crystal balls just do not 
work very well.


	By the way, a number of people seem very angry at me - not that I 
really care - for my positions in this thread.  Yet when challenged, 
none of them have provided any examples of my being rude or of my 
attacking anyone personally.  I have declared certain statements to be 
nonsense or absurd, but how is that either disrespectful or impolite?  I 
absolutely reserve the right to challenge any statement by anyone.  If 
someone feels that to be disrespectful, then they are entitled to their 
opinion, but I submit they are just plain wrong, period.

Re: Please be respectful

[ellanios82]

> wrestling with a pig gains you nothing but a
layer of mud, and amuses the pig



.

 old song :


"PIG GOT UP AND SLOWLY WALKED AWAY, THE
(Music: F W Bowers / Lyrics: Benjamin Hapgood Burt)


Frank Crumit - 1934
Johnny Bond - 1966
Jim Croce - 1975

Also recorded by: Sam Hinton; Rudy Vallee;
Harry Belafonte; Clinton Ford; Acker Bilk.



One evening in October
When I was about one-third sober
And was taking home a load with manly pride
My poor feet began to stutter
So I lay down in the gutter
And a pig came up and lay down by my side

Then we sang "It's All Fair Weather"
And "Good Fellows Get Together"
Till a lady passing by was heard to say
She says, "You can tell a man who boozes
By the company he chooses"
And the pig got up and slowly walked away

Yes, the pig got up and slowly walked away
Slowly walked away, slowly walked away
Yes, the pig got up and he turned and winked at me
As he slowly walked away

I also well remember
One evening in November
When I was creeping home at break of day
For in my exhilaration
I engaged in conversation
With a cab-horse, right on the corner of Broadway

I was filled up to the eyeballs
With a flock of gin and highballs
So I whispered to the cab-horse old and grey
I says, "It's these all-night homeward marches
That gave us both our fallen arches."
And the old horse laughed and slowly walked away

Yes, the old horse laughed and slowly walked away
Slowly walked away, he slowly walked away
And the old horse laughed and he turned and winked at me
As he slowly walked away
As he slowly walked away  "





..

 rgds

Re: Please be respectful

[Joe]

On Mon, 26 Oct 2020 14:59:16 +0200
Andrei POPESCU  wrote:

> On Sb, 24 oct 20, 03:46:20, Leslie Rhorer wrote:
> > 
> > On 10/17/2020 1:59 AM, Andrei POPESCU wrote:  
> > > 
> > > This could be understood that in your opinion it is ok to be rude
> > > to a person unless that person has somehow earned your respect.
> > > 
> > > Is this what you meant?  
> > 
> > It is neither what I said, nor what should properly be
> > inferred from it. As I already mentioned, there is a difference
> > between rudeness and disrespect.  There is also a big difference
> > between not respecting someone and being either rude or
> > disrespectful to them.  I am not quite sure it is really ever OK to
> > be rude.  I know it is never acceptable to engage in puerile
> > behavior such as name-calling or ad hominem attacks.
> > 
> > It is also a very different thing to reserve one's respect
> > and one's opinions until someone has proven themselves than from
> > engaging in a gratuitous, unprovoked verbal attack.  Please do not
> > attempt to extrapolate from my statements beyond reasonable logical
> > boundaries. For one thing, it is rude to do so.  (But not
> > necessarily disrespectful.)  
>  
> I'm quite certain at least part of this huge discussion is caused by 
> misunderstandings.
> 
> This is my attempt to clarify at least some of it.
> 
> Apparently I failed.
> 

It's all a bit subjective. As I understand things, a stranger deserves
politeness, and also a default value of respect, which as Leslie says,
is worth nothing as it applies to every stranger. 

Genuine, higher-than-default respect can only be earned, but politeness
should always be maintained, even in the face of rudeness. Here's
another Internet meme: wrestling with a pig gains you nothing but a
layer of mud, and amuses the pig.

-- 
Joe

Re: Please be respectful

[Andrei POPESCU]

On Sb, 24 oct 20, 03:46:20, Leslie Rhorer wrote:
> 
> On 10/17/2020 1:59 AM, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> > 
> > This could be understood that in your opinion it is ok to be rude to a
> > person unless that person has somehow earned your respect.
> > 
> > Is this what you meant?
> 
>   It is neither what I said, nor what should properly be inferred from it.
> As I already mentioned, there is a difference between rudeness and
> disrespect.  There is also a big difference between not respecting someone
> and being either rude or disrespectful to them.  I am not quite sure it is
> really ever OK to be rude.  I know it is never acceptable to engage in
> puerile behavior such as name-calling or ad hominem attacks.
> 
>   It is also a very different thing to reserve one's respect and one's
> opinions until someone has proven themselves than from engaging in a
> gratuitous, unprovoked verbal attack.  Please do not attempt to extrapolate
> from my statements beyond reasonable logical boundaries. For one thing, it
> is rude to do so.  (But not necessarily disrespectful.)
 
I'm quite certain at least part of this huge discussion is caused by 
misunderstandings.

This is my attempt to clarify at least some of it.

Apparently I failed.

Kind regards,
Andrei
-- 
http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Please be respectful

[Charles Curley]

On Sun, 25 Oct 2020 09:59:05 +0100
Jan Foniok  wrote:

> > On 18 Oct 2020, at 04:06, Weaver  wrote:

> Just for the record, I'm actually sick of you and Leslie Rhorer.

Hear, hear.


-- 
Does anybody read signatures any more?

https://charlescurley.com
https://charlescurley.com/blog/

Re: Please be respectful

[Jan Foniok]

> On 18 Oct 2020, at 04:06, Weaver  wrote:
> 
> On 18-10-2020 11:42, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
>> Le 17 octobre 2020 23:03:22 GMT+02:00, Weaver  a
>> écrit :
> 
> And now we go another step further: with double postings into my inbox.
> Why don't you massage your petit ego requirements on somebody else's
> time.?
> I'm quite sure everybody here is as sick of it as I am.

Just for the record, I'm actually sick of you and Leslie Rhorer.

Re: Please be respectful

[Andrew M.A. Cater]

On Sat, Oct 24, 2020 at 07:31:11PM +0200, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
> Le samedi 24 octobre 2020 à 12:07:09-0500, Leslie Rhorer a écrit :
> > 
> > 
> > On 10/24/2020 11:46 AM, Pierre-Elliott B�cue wrote:
> > > Le samedi 24 octobre 2020 � 10:39:56-0500, Leslie Rhorer a �crit�:
> > > > [snip]
> > > 
> > > Honestly, I don't care about your opinion. If you don't want to follow
> > 
> > So let me get this straight.  I want very much to hear your opinion.
> > Indeed, I would be willing to fight and if need be die to protect your right
> > to express your opinion.  You, however, cannot be bothered to hear mine.
> 
> I read it thrice, a fourth time is not going to have any better outcome.
> 
> > Yet I am disrespectful?  Right.
> 
> You are when you try to impose your values on a place where a set of
> rules already exist.
> 
> > > the local rules, go waste people's time elsewhere.
> > 
> > Only a fool or one devoid of morals and ethics follows rules.  As a free
> > man, I follow nothing and no one.
> 
> Then please go following nothing and no one elsewhere.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> -- 
> Pierre-Elliott Bécue
> GPG: 9AE0 4D98 6400 E3B6 7528  F493 0D44 2664 1949 74E2
> It's far easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them.

Leslie,

You clearly have a great deal to say about your personal morals and ethics and 
you do not regard yourself as anybody's fool. 
"Never argue with a fool on the Internet - after a couple of rounds, a 
dispassionate observer will not be able to tell who's who"

Your responses in this and other threads are neither necessarily constructive 
nor helping other people to appreciate you more widely. 
I would respectfully suggest that you could profitably go back and read the 
list archives to find examples of good and useful 
communication styles that will allow you to bring your expertise to bear more 
usefully to every reader's benefit.

The Debian mailing list code of conduct (see below) is here to try and bring 
some of these things more clearly to people's attention
if they don't already know,

The Debian Code of Conduct (see below) is more wide ranging and applies to any 
and all Debian assets. In many ways, it's based on 
getting the best out of how we work: we're aware of the sorts of issues that 
can cause problems or attitudes that can alienate 
people and would not wish to perpetuate these.

With thanks for your reading time,

All the very best, as ever,

Andy Cater [amaca...@debian.org]

https://www.debian.org/MailingLists/
https://www.debian.org/code_of_conduct

Re: Please be respectful

[Leslie Rhorer]

On 10/24/2020 12:01 PM, Doug McGarrett wrote:


These messages are very unrespectful.


There is no such word as "unrespectful".

	In what way are any of my messages disrespectful?  (Answer: they are 
not.) I have not called anyone a name.  I have not made any derogatory 
comments about anyone in this list.  I have not engaged in any ad 
hominem attacks, or indeed any attack of any sort, personal or 
otherwise, on anyone here.


I don't need a screen full of this 


	None of these messages fill more than half my screen, and none take 
more than 30 seconds to read.



BS!


	They are not BS.  Please demonstrate where even one of the sentences is 
demonstrably wrong or poorly considered.  Your saying something is BS is 
in no way evidence it is B.S.



Stop it!


	Why?  They are certainly not off-topic for the thread.  If you find 
them less than desirable in some way, that is not my problem.

Re: Please be respectful

[john doe]

On 10/24/2020 7:31 PM, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:

Le samedi 24 octobre 2020 à 12:07:09-0500, Leslie Rhorer a écrit :



On 10/24/2020 11:46 AM, Pierre-Elliott B�cue wrote:

Le samedi 24 octobre 2020 � 10:39:56-0500, Leslie Rhorer a �crit�:

[snip]


Honestly, I don't care about your opinion. If you don't want to follow


So let me get this straight.  I want very much to hear your opinion.
Indeed, I would be willing to fight and if need be die to protect your right
to express your opinion.  You, however, cannot be bothered to hear mine.


I read it thrice, a fourth time is not going to have any better outcome.


Yet I am disrespectful?  Right.


You are when you try to impose your values on a place where a set of
rules already exist.


the local rules, go waste people's time elsewhere.


Only a fool or one devoid of morals and ethics follows rules.  As a free
man, I follow nothing and no one.


Then please go following nothing and no one elsewhere.

Regards,



Please, take this elsewhere.

--
John Doe

Re: Please be respectful

[Pierre-Elliott Bécue]

Le samedi 24 octobre 2020 à 12:07:09-0500, Leslie Rhorer a écrit :
> 
> 
> On 10/24/2020 11:46 AM, Pierre-Elliott B�cue wrote:
> > Le samedi 24 octobre 2020 � 10:39:56-0500, Leslie Rhorer a �crit�:
> > > [snip]
> > 
> > Honestly, I don't care about your opinion. If you don't want to follow
> 
>   So let me get this straight.  I want very much to hear your opinion.
> Indeed, I would be willing to fight and if need be die to protect your right
> to express your opinion.  You, however, cannot be bothered to hear mine.

I read it thrice, a fourth time is not going to have any better outcome.

>   Yet I am disrespectful?  Right.

You are when you try to impose your values on a place where a set of
rules already exist.

> > the local rules, go waste people's time elsewhere.
> 
>   Only a fool or one devoid of morals and ethics follows rules.  As a free
> man, I follow nothing and no one.

Then please go following nothing and no one elsewhere.

Regards,

-- 
Pierre-Elliott Bécue
GPG: 9AE0 4D98 6400 E3B6 7528  F493 0D44 2664 1949 74E2
It's far easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them.


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Please be respectful

[Doug McGarrett]

These messages are very unrespectful. I don't need a screen full of this 
BS! Stop it!

On 10/24/20 12:23 PM, Leslie Rhorer wrote:



On 10/24/2020 3:11 AM, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:

On Sat, Oct 24, 2020 at 02:52:41AM -0500, Leslie Rhorer wrote:

[...]


A couple of decades ago I had to have spinal surgery [...]
What he thought of me as a person was completely irrelevant.


Nice example. If you now try to abstract from it, that means
exactly that: whatever criteria each one choses to be important
is none of your (or my) business.


That is exceedingly poor abstraction.  What it means is I would 
have to be a complete idiot to allow my personal feelings to interfere 
in any way with my ability to continue living and breathing.  It also 
means his manner, no matter how offensive, is in no way relevant to 
his skill.


Of course, there is also absolutely no way he or anyone else is 
going to hurt my feelings by being brutally truthful.  The only thing 
that mattered is he felt he could fix me.



Our duty


Duty?  Are you serious?  I certainly never took an oath to 
Debian.  Did you?  My duty is what I choose it to be, and nothing else.



is to find ways of getting along together


Who says?  It is definitely not my top priority.


while trying to respect this.


While trying to respect what?  I never, ever *TRY* to respect 
anyone or anything.  I either do or I do not.  Neither is at all 
difficult.



Perhaps to someone else her physician's bedside
manners are more important that her own life?


Are you suggesting women are idiots?  If not, then why do you say, 
"Her"?


In the great scheme of things, I am perfectly well aware my life 
is not particularly important.  Not very long from now I will cease to 
live, and in less than a century - probably not much more than a 
decade - no one will have any idea who I was or even that I ever 
lived.  Boo Hoo. That my life is far, far less important than many 
millions of other things does not, however, mean my life is not worth 
much more than many things.  My personal feelings are way, way down 
that list.



It's on us to respect that.


No, it isn't.  Not even a tiny bit.  I respect anyone's right - 
male or female - to be as stupid as they want to be.  That does not 
mean I respect them, nor can anyone anywhere compel me to do so.  I 
also will not choose to mourn anyone killed by their own foolishness.

Re: Please be respectful

[Leslie Rhorer]

On 10/24/2020 11:46 AM, Pierre-Elliott B�cue wrote:

Le samedi 24 octobre 2020 � 10:39:56-0500, Leslie Rhorer a �crit�:

[snip]


Honestly, I don't care about your opinion. If you don't want to follow


	So let me get this straight.  I want very much to hear your opinion. 
Indeed, I would be willing to fight and if need be die to protect your 
right to express your opinion.  You, however, cannot be bothered to hear 
mine.


Yet I am disrespectful?  Right.


the local rules, go waste people's time elsewhere.


	Only a fool or one devoid of morals and ethics follows rules.  As a 
free man, I follow nothing and no one.

Re: Please be respectful

[Leslie Rhorer]

On 10/24/2020 11:46 AM, Dan Ritter wrote:

Leslie Rhorer wrote: a bunch of words that indicate that they
aren't interested in politeness as a tool for lubricating social
interactions, even when a minimal attempt at such is the
recognized currency of the community.


	Why would I want to have any "social interactions" in the first place? 
I don't know you, I don't know the vast majority of any so-called 
community, and  I have no particular desire to get to know any but a 
small handful.  The very last thing on Earth I would ever want to be is 
"popular".  I would much rather have gangrene.




One of the great things about the Internet is that, in any
competent interaction system, one can filter out jerks.


	So much for your so-called "politeness".  Why is it those who proclaim 
so loudly they demand something are the very first to deny it to others?

Re: Please be respectful

[Pierre-Elliott Bécue]

Le samedi 24 octobre 2020 à 10:39:56-0500, Leslie Rhorer a écrit :
> [snip]

Honestly, I don't care about your opinion. If you don't want to follow
the local rules, go waste people's time elsewhere.

Regards,

-- 
Pierre-Elliott Bécue
GPG: 9AE0 4D98 6400 E3B6 7528  F493 0D44 2664 1949 74E2
It's far easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them.


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Please be respectful

[Dan Ritter]

Leslie Rhorer wrote: a bunch of words that indicate that they
aren't interested in politeness as a tool for lubricating social
interactions, even when a minimal attempt at such is the
recognized currency of the community.

One of the great things about the Internet is that, in any
competent interaction system, one can filter out jerks.

Plonk.

-dsr-

Re: Please be respectful

[Leslie Rhorer]

On 10/24/2020 3:11 AM, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:

On Sat, Oct 24, 2020 at 02:52:41AM -0500, Leslie Rhorer wrote:

[...]


A couple of decades ago I had to have spinal surgery [...]
What he thought of me as a person was completely irrelevant.


Nice example. If you now try to abstract from it, that means
exactly that: whatever criteria each one choses to be important
is none of your (or my) business.


	That is exceedingly poor abstraction.  What it means is I would have to 
be a complete idiot to allow my personal feelings to interfere in any 
way with my ability to continue living and breathing.  It also means his 
manner, no matter how offensive, is in no way relevant to his skill.


	Of course, there is also absolutely no way he or anyone else is going 
to hurt my feelings by being brutally truthful.  The only thing that 
mattered is he felt he could fix me.



Our duty


	Duty?  Are you serious?  I certainly never took an oath to Debian.  Did 
you?  My duty is what I choose it to be, and nothing else.



is to find ways of getting along together


Who says?  It is definitely not my top priority.


while trying to respect this.


	While trying to respect what?  I never, ever *TRY* to respect anyone or 
anything.  I either do or I do not.  Neither is at all difficult.



Perhaps to someone else her physician's bedside
manners are more important that her own life?


Are you suggesting women are idiots?  If not, then why do you say, 
"Her"?

	In the great scheme of things, I am perfectly well aware my life is not 
particularly important.  Not very long from now I will cease to live, 
and in less than a century - probably not much more than a decade - no 
one will have any idea who I was or even that I ever lived.  Boo Hoo. 
That my life is far, far less important than many millions of other 
things does not, however, mean my life is not worth much more than many 
things.  My personal feelings are way, way down that list.



It's on us to respect that.


	No, it isn't.  Not even a tiny bit.  I respect anyone's right - male or 
female - to be as stupid as they want to be.  That does not mean I 
respect them, nor can anyone anywhere compel me to do so.  I also will 
not choose to mourn anyone killed by their own foolishness.

Re: Please be respectful

[Leslie Rhorer]

On 10/24/2020 8:59 AM, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:

  it's foolish to argue with foolish peopleif i receive unpleasant message, i 
just ignore it (keep quiet)


In general, this is a good strategy.


In general, I disagree.


Leslie, I stopped discussing with you for a long while. I'm not
interested in picking it up now.


	You have *GOT* to be kidding.  "A long while"?  Fifty years is a long 
while, perhaps.  A billion years is definitely so.

Re: Please be respectful

[Leslie Rhorer]

On 10/18/2020 7:39 AM, Pierre-Elliott B�cue wrote:

In your perception.


Looking at the number of people who replied to tell you your attitude is
not welcome, I think it is a bit more than just my perception.


	It would be rather remarkable if it were only yours.  A singular 
perception limited to a single person is a delusion, and you don't seem 
delusional.  My question is, "So what?"



I guess this is why Andrew sent his reply just to you,
instead of giving you another shovel to dig with.

I don't know what you are trying to achieve here, but I stand my point
: your lack of respect for others is not welcome here.


And I stand mine: respect is a quality that needs to be earned.


Not here.


	Everywhere.  Otherwise, as I pointed out more than once, it is 
completely worthless and of no use or value to anyone.  It is analogous 
to giving every single person a PhD.  Having done so, having a PhD would 
be absolutely meaningless.  If absolutely everyone is given complete 
respect regardless of their behavior then respect means nothing.  Zilch. 
 Nada.  Complete zero.  Then asking for it anywhere including here, 
serves no purpose whatsoever.


	I do not understand how anyone can fail to understand this.  Suppose 
everything were free to everyone just for the asking.  What would be the 
point of having money?


	You are not doing anyone any favors by insisting upon universal 
respect.  Quite the opposite, you are offering everyone the highest 
possible level of disrespect.  Claiming everyone should be given respect 
is *EXACTLY* the same as saying no one deserves it, least of all those 
who have worked hardest to deserve it.


	You need to understand, it is *YOU* who are guilty of disrespect in 
that you try to destroy any value inherent in respect.  It is *YOU* who 
are being far and away the most offensive.



Not in the biggest part of the society.


	The biggest part of "society" (whatever that is) deserves nothing 
whatsoever unless they earn it.  Neither does the smallest.



Respect is presumed, and then is either confirmed or lost.


	First of all, that is quibbling.  Whether something is afforded 
a-priori and then withdrawn or afforded only after the fact is a minor 
distinction.  You said it must be afforded to everyone.  Now you are 
saying it does not have to be afforded to everyone.  You cannot have it 
both ways.



Feel free to abide by the rules
you like at your home, but here the rules are not yours. If you're not
fine with these rules, it's the same as any private space: either remain
silent or leave.


	I do not feel compelled to abide by any rules, anywhere.  I am as much 
as possible a free man, which means I answer to no one.  I choose to do 
my very best to behave in a strictly ethical and consistent manner, 
causing injury to no one and as much as possible allowing those around 
me to enjoy as much freedom as possible.  Others may think of me what 
they will.  I really could not possibly care less.


	That said, it is never my intent to be rude.  If you perceive me to be 
rude, then you are mistaking my intent, regardless of what you think may 
have been my meaning.



Many times people let rude and aggressive tones and behaviours go,
because


	I let rude and aggressive tones and behaviors go because they mean 
nothing at all, especially not to me.  I have many, many important 
things to consider in my life.  Someone being snarky to me on a mailing 
list doesn't even make it into the top 500.



are rules to interact on these lists and that one tries to show that
he's smarter and rules don't apply to him are just boring for everyone.
But from time to time, it's required to remind to everyone that just
because we don't react all the time doesn't mean we think less.


Is there a point there?  If so, I missed it.

Re: Please be respectful

[tomas]

On Sat, Oct 24, 2020 at 05:45:07AM -0500, Leslie Rhorer wrote:
> 
> 
> On 10/18/2020 7:12 AM, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
> >On Sun, Oct 18, 2020 at 11:52:20AM +, Long Wind wrote:
> >>  it's foolish to argue with foolish peopleif i receive unpleasant message, 
> >> i just ignore it (keep quiet)
> >
> >In general, this is a good strategy.
> 
>   In general, I disagree.

Leslie, I stopped discussing with you for a long while. I'm not
interested in picking it up now.

Bye
 - t


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Please be respectful

[Leslie Rhorer]

On 10/18/2020 7:12 AM, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:

On Sun, Oct 18, 2020 at 11:52:20AM +, Long Wind wrote:

  it's foolish to argue with foolish peopleif i receive unpleasant message, i 
just ignore it (keep quiet)


In general, this is a good strategy.


In general, I disagree.


Still, there are people
around who feel hurt by things


	So what?  I am hurt by many, many things.  That does not mean it would 
be appropriate for me to attempt to make others responsible for my pain. 
 My pain is my problem.  Their pain is theirs.



and are too shy to speak up;


	That is their problem and their prerogative.  Neither you or I are 
responsible for it.



It's a fine line to walk: of course I only have my subjective
impression as a guide


	That is not true.  Thousands of volumes of other people's impressions 
and experiences have been put down on paper.  We all have their wisdom 
readily available.



and that may be wrong, so it's quite
possible that I'm being unjust when I speak up.


	I find that unlikely.  Speaking one's mind - whether right or wrong - 
is virtually never unjust and only very rarely unwise.



So I sincerely hope to be corrected in those case. That's the
only way to learn.


	If not the only way, then at least the best one.  It is no favor to 
anyone to allow them to continue to believe something to be correct that 
is not.

Re: Please be respectful

[Leslie Rhorer]

On 10/18/2020 6:52 AM, Long Wind wrote:

it's foolish to argue with foolish people
if i receive unpleasant message, i just ignore it (keep quiet)


 “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to 
do nothing.”― Edmund Burke


In my opinion, the *LAST* thing one should do is keep quiet.

Re: Please be respectful

[Leslie Rhorer]

On 10/18/2020 6:39 AM, Christoph K. wrote:

We're on a Debian mailing list here. Being respectful is part of the
Debian Code of Conduct 


	Being polite is not, nor is offering respect.  I submit you may need to 
lean the difference between being polite, being respectful, and holding 
respect.  They are three very different things.



which reflects the values of this community:


	Talk about arrogance!  It reflects nothing more or less than an 
attempted expression of the ideals of those who penned the rules, 
whether they be good, bad, or indifferent.  I certainly did not even 
vote on them, nor have the vast majority of the members of this list.  I 
request you please do not try to endow this forum with some repulsive 
notion of grandeur.



If both of you openly state that you oppose the idea of being respectful


	I never said that, and it is in fact disrespectful of you to 
misrepresent the things I say.  Are we to believe the rest of us must be 
respectful, while you are exempt?



with other people unless they have earned your respect (according to your
perception)


	Is it your claim you ever make statements that are not according to 
your perception?  Is your perception somehow better than mine?



you more or less directly state that you oppose the Debian
Code of Conduct.


	Once again, it is disrespectful to put words in other people's mouths. 
Why is it OK for you to disrespect others but not the rest of us?


	BTW, it is my absolute right to oppose the Debian Code of Conduct or 
anything else I choose to oppose.  Are you suggesting otherwise?  If so, 
we need to have that very unpleasant conversation I mentioned.



Apart from that, both of you have broken a couple of rules from the
Mailing lists code of conduct: https://www.debian.org/MailingLists/

* Non-constructive [...] messages [...] are not welcome


	Which part of what messages of mine were non-constructive, realizing of 
course the very notion is highly subjective?  I am not compelled to 
agree with you or anyone else what is or is not constructive, but I 
still want to know how you consider them to be or not be.



* Do not use foul language; [...]


	What is "foul" language?  I do not know of the existence of any such 
thing.  There are, I suppose, George Carlin's Seven Words One Can Never 
Say on Radio and Television.  Interestingly enough, I have heard all of 
them on radio and television, but I have not used them here.  Why anyone 
would object to their use, I really haven't much of a clue, but on the 
other hand I don't recall using any of them here.  Please point out any 
passages where I employed what you deem "foul language" used by me.



* Try not to flame; it is not polite.


I *NEVER* flame anyone, anywhere, or any time.

	A blatantly false accusation such as this is highly disrespectful, far 
more than I have ever been.  Once again you are claiming I have failed 
to meet a supposed standard and trying to hold me to a far higher one 
than to which you hold yourself.



* Use common sense all the time.


Define common sense.


I hope some people will draw some meaningful consequences.


I think perhaps you should hope not.

Re: Please be respectful

[Leslie Rhorer]

On 10/18/2020 5:23 AM, Michael uplawski wrote:

Weaver:


And I stand mine: respect is a quality that needs to be earned.


All living thing, and maybe more merit respect as a matter of fact.


	That is total horse crap.  As I pointed out before, anything given 
without discrimination to everyone without respect to merit is 
completely worthless by definition.  If this is the case for your 
respect, then do not bopther to offer it to me, because it is less than 
nothing.


	I maintain, however, that my respect has both meaning and value, and as 
such will under no circumstances be afforded to any who cannot be 
bothered to earn it.  I am generally loathe to quote the Bible, but 
Matthew 7:6 says, "Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither 
cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their 
feet, and turn again and rend you.


	You may go offering "respect" to thieves, murderers, rapists, and 
blithering idiots, but I refuse.

Re: Please be respectful

[Leslie Rhorer]

On 10/17/2020 3:09 AM, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:

On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 04:46:42PM -0500, Leslie Rhorer wrote:



On 10/16/2020 4:57 AM, Pierre-Elliott B�cue wrote:


[...]


This is nonsense.  Whenever I  forced to do something, or worse
yet, prevented from doing something by a consensus of incompetent
individuals, I have every right to complain.


... and when *you* get to decide who is to be "a consensus of
incompetent individuals" is the point where we part ways.


	A consensus is not a "who".  It is a thing.  In particular it is an 
explicit or implicit judgement concerning some topic.  It is a 
figurative vote concerning a specific idea.


	A single person - in this case me - never decides what a consensus is. 
By definition, a consensus is produced by a group, typically a large one.


	Finally, who is or is not competent can of course be opined by anyone, 
but in general such an opinion has greater weight from a professional 
than an amateur.  In many cases, such as this one, there are 
quantitative standards of measurement.  In short, anyone who falls 
significantly short of being a qualified expert in Linux fits the bill 
for this example.



Sorry, I'm a command line junkie myself, and I try to seduce
people to try that anytime I get a chance, but your stance above
can only be characterised as arrogant.


	OK.  So what?  Apparently you think there is something wrong with being 
arrogant, which by the way makes your comment a personal attack and 
something other than polite, but what is wrong with being arrogant?  One 
can argue, and I would tend to agree, there is something wrong with 
overweening arrogance unsupported by ability, but I find nothing wrong 
with arrogance in or of itself.



Feel free to ignore """lazy""" people from now on, but don't be
irrespectful to them.

You have no right to, and they don't deserve it.


There is no such word - or concept - as irrespectful [...]


C'mon. This is a mailing list in English, but its basis is very
international. You get to enjoy the fact that other people try
to adapt to your language as well as they can.


	What is your point?  There is nothing in the simple statement above 
that suggests I do not appreciate the fact others are  making an attempt 
to broaden their language skills.  Quite the opposite, the only rational 
deduction is I am attempting to help in their endeavor to do so.  My 
question to you is, "Why aren't you helping"?  Saying nothing in no way 
helps anyone improve their knowledge.




In this context, Postel's law [1] should apply (not only in
language things, mind you).


	I advise you not to push that button of mine.  I absolutely detest when 
people attempt to stretch perfectly rigid technical or scientific 
postulates to cover situations completely irrelevant to the law in 
question.  Postel's Robustness Principle concerns software protocols 
used by computing devices to transfer data.  I am not a computer.


> Go fix your error correction algorithm. A new prefix mapping (e.g.
> i -> dis, with the usual phonetic embellishments) might go a long
> way.

Don't be ridiculous.

Re: Please be respectful

[Leslie Rhorer]

On 10/17/2020 1:59 AM, Andrei POPESCU wrote:

On Vi, 16 oct 20, 16:46:42, Leslie Rhorer wrote:


On 10/16/2020 4:57 AM, Pierre-Elliott B�cue wrote:


Feel free to ignore """lazy""" people from now on, but don't be
irrespectful to them.

You have no right to, and they don't deserve it.


There is no such word - or concept - as irrespectful.


Please excuse us non-native English speakers for such mistakes. As far


	No excuse or apology is required.  The mistake was clearly an honest 
one.  I simply corrected it, just as I would expect and appreciate 
anyone else to do for me.



as I can tell Pierre-Elliot meant "rude".


	I think perhaps he meant "disrespectful", which is not quite the same 
as "rude"



The point you were
apparently trying to make, however, is just completely wrong.  I, and anyone
else, have every right to reserve my respect from whomever I choose.
Respect is *EARNED*. It is not a right and it is not a privilege.  Until
someone does earn respect, there is no reason anyone should afford it them.
It is utterly ridiculous to think everyone deserves respect.  If it is
afforded to everyone, then it becomes totally worthless.


This could be understood that in your opinion it is ok to be rude to a
person unless that person has somehow earned your respect.

Is this what you meant?


	It is neither what I said, nor what should properly be inferred from 
it.  As I already mentioned, there is a difference between rudeness and 
disrespect.  There is also a big difference between not respecting 
someone and being either rude or disrespectful to them.  I am not quite 
sure it is really ever OK to be rude.  I know it is never acceptable to 
engage in puerile behavior such as name-calling or ad hominem attacks.


	It is also a very different thing to reserve one's respect and one's 
opinions until someone has proven themselves than from engaging in a 
gratuitous, unprovoked verbal attack.  Please do not attempt to 
extrapolate from my statements beyond reasonable logical boundaries. 
For one thing, it is rude to do so.  (But not necessarily disrespectful.)

Re: Please be respectful

[Leslie Rhorer]

On 10/17/2020 12:39 AM, Weaver wrote:

On 17-10-2020 15:05, Michael uplawski wrote:

Leslie Rhorer:

Until someone does earn respect, there is no reason anyone
should afford it them.  It is utterly ridiculous to think everyone
deserves respect.


This is where you are excluding yourself from the human community. Face
it. Live with it. *We* will be fine, anyway.


Rubbish!


Indubitably.


There are certain qualities which must be extended before you are worthy
of receiving them, trust, loyalty, to mention a couple, but you can
throw respect in there also, along with one or two others.
I have to earn the respect of every child I meet, and maintain the
standard every time I encounter that child in the future.


	Absolutely.  Some folks, however, think we should respect those who 
sexually molest children, rather than cherish them.  They seem to think 
those who treat stupidity as a virtue should be held in the same regard 
as mental giants.  It is complete nonsense.



Some, in their retarded viewpoint, believe respect is something
engendered by social position.


	That is a little different than saying it is engendered by simply 
having a pulse, as some here are suggesting.



Wrong!


Yes.  I am not quite sure which is worse.


Social position is engendered by earned level of respect.


	If I take your meaning, then I disagree with you there.  "Social 
position" is just an idiotic notion of no particular value.  It is 
unimportant who or what one is.  It isn't all that important what one 
says.  All that is truly important is the things one does, with the most 
important being what one does for others.



`excluding yourself from the human community', what a load of puerile
ignorance!


	Puerile, certainly.  I am not sure "ignorance" is the best term, 
however.  "Foolishness" might be better.

Re: Please be respectful

[Leslie Rhorer]

On 10/17/2020 12:05 AM, Michael uplawski wrote:

Leslie Rhorer:

Until someone does earn respect, there is no reason anyone
should afford it them.  It is utterly ridiculous to think everyone
deserves respect.


This is where you are excluding yourself from the human community.


	'Not at all a bad idea, that.  Exactly what has the so-called "human 
community" ever done for me?  It has done more than a few highly 
objectionable, even potentially lethal things to me but nothing I can 
recall at the moment for me.


	Please recall for us what things it has ever done for you.  (Before you 
respond, remember a loving friend or relative, or even a decent stranger 
does not constitute the "human community".)



Face it.


Why should I?  Because you say so?


Live with it.


Why should I?  Because you say so?


*We* will be fine, anyway.


	Well Bully for you.  Who is "we", anyway?  The "human community"?  Do 
you fail to realize that includes people like Adolf Hitler, Charles 
Manson, Jeffrey Dahmer, Osama Bin Laden, Barack Obama, and Donald Trump? 
 I absolutely do wish to be excluded from any group containing any of 
them or anyone anything like them.  Feel free yourself to be considered 
in the same breath as they.  Do not expect me to respect them, certainly 
not just because you do.

Re: Please be respectful

[tomas]

On Sat, Oct 24, 2020 at 02:52:41AM -0500, Leslie Rhorer wrote:

[...]

>   A couple of decades ago I had to have spinal surgery [...]
> What he thought of me as a person was completely irrelevant.

Nice example. If you now try to abstract from it, that means
exactly that: whatever criteria each one choses to be important
is none of your (or my) business.

Our duty is to find ways of getting along together while trying
to respect this. Perhaps to someone else her physician's bedside
manners are more important that her own life? It's on us to
respect that.

Cheers
 - t


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Please be respectful

[Leslie Rhorer]

On 10/15/2020 9:20 AM, Felmon Davis wrote:

On Thu, 15 Oct 2020, gru...@mailfence.com wrote:


Reading this thread reinforces just how old I am
The whole world seems to be wearing their feelings on the sleeve


I doubt it's age-related; many feel under threat for various reasons 
though maybe we don't always pick apt targets or choose apt remedies.


	Perhaps or perhaps not.  Certainly it has become popular to consider 
emotions and unsupported opinions to be important.  This thread would 
seem to be evidence of that.


	A couple of decades ago I had to have spinal surgery to try to 
eliminate paralysis and possibly even save my life.  My personal 
physician was recommending several surgeons.  At the top of her list was 
a surgeon of high qualifications.  She said, "He does not always have 
the best bedside manner."  What the @#%$ would I care what his bedside 
manner was?  I did not want him to be my best friend.  I wanted him to 
take a very sharp knife and cut deep into my throat without killing me. 
How he made me feel was completely irrelevant.  What he thought of me as 
a person was completely irrelevant.

Re: Please be respectful

[tomas]

On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 11:50:36AM +, Long Wind wrote:
>  
> On Sunday, October 18, 2020, 8:12:54 AM EDT,  wrote:  
> In general, this is a good strategy. Still, there are people
> around who feel hurt by things and are too shy to speak up;
> it's thinking of those that I do sometimes.
> 
> 
> i'm able to keep quiet, because i remind myself that others' word isn't 
> necessarily truth. not responding doesn't necessarily mean tacitly admitting 
> i'm wrong. it's not easy to control one's feeling, but my experience has 
> taught me that it's often more difficult to change others' behavior. 

This is wise. As I said, I totally respect your position. I tried
to explain how I try to do things, but I was in no way proposing
that you do the same. This would be arrogant :-)

> in your word i'm shy, actully i'm in poor health,  i have to save energy, 
> getting angry isn't good to health.

Sorry if I came across that way. I wasn't questioning your motives
at all: I'm not entitled to that.

As to your health, I wish you strength to cope with that. And
good friends.

Cheers
 - t


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Please be respectful

[Andrei POPESCU]

On Du, 18 oct 20, 14:12:32, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 18, 2020 at 11:52:20AM +, Long Wind wrote:
> >  it's foolish to argue with foolish peopleif i receive unpleasant message, 
> > i just ignore it (keep quiet)
> 
> In general, this is a good strategy. Still, there are people
> around who feel hurt by things and are too shy to speak up;
> it's thinking of those that I do sometimes.
> 
> It's a fine line to walk: of course I only have my subjective
> impression as a guide, and that may be wrong, so it's quite
> possible that I'm being unjust when I speak up.
> 
> So I sincerely hope to be corrected in those case. That's the
> only way to learn.

I fully agree and subscribe to the above.

Kind regards,
Andrei
-- 
http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Please be respectful

[Pierre-Elliott Bécue]

Le samedi 17 octobre 2020 à 19:03:17-0700, Weaver a écrit :
> On 18-10-2020 11:42, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
> > Le 17 octobre 2020 23:03:22 GMT+02:00, Weaver  a
> > écrit :
> > 
> >> On 18-10-2020 00:53, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote:
> >> On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 10:39:01PM -0700, Weaver wrote:
> >> On 17-10-2020 15:05, Michael uplawski wrote:
> >> Leslie Rhorer:
> >> Until someone does earn respect, there is no reason anyone
> >> should afford it them. It is utterly ridiculous to think everyone
> >> deserves respect.
> >>
> >> This is where you are excluding yourself from the human community.
> >> Face
> >> it. Live with it. *We* will be fine, anyway.
> > 
> > Rubbish!
> > 
> > Tone not helpful here on either side.
> > 
> > Rubbish is rubbish
> > Some may see a point in dressing it up as otherwise.
> > I don't.
> > 
> >>> There are certain qualities which must be extended before you are
> >>> worthy
> >>> of receiving them, trust, loyalty, to mention a couple, but you
> >>> can
> >>> throw respect in there also, along with one or two others.
> >>> I have to earn the respect of every child I meet, and maintain the
> >>> standard every time I encounter that child in the future.
> >>> Some, in their retarded viewpoint, believe respect is something
> >>> engendered by social position.
> >>
> >> Retarded is not a helpful term here or, indeed, anywhere.
> > 
> > Retarded is retarded.
> > You seem to prefer to believe it is aimed at an individual, when it is
> > clearly applied to a viewpoint.
> > 
> >>> Wrong!
> >>> Social position is engendered by earned level of respect.
> >>> `excluding yourself from the human community', what a load of
> >>> puerile
> >>> ignorance!
> >>
> >> Puerile here is also not helpful. Considered, constructive language
> >> which advances a thought through viewpoint is preferable.
> >> Another way of putting it "never argue with an idiot on the
> >> Internet.
> >> After a couple of rounds, a dispassionate observer will not be able
> >> to tell who's who"
> > 
> > Puerile is puerile.
> > `Immature, especially in being silly or trivial; childish'.
> > The terminology applies: employ it.
> > `Considered, constructive language' - is language which communicates
> > effectively.
> > `which advances a thought through viewpoint' - Pseudo-intellectual
> > waffle! 
> > You know another method?
> > Observation is dependent on conditioned viewpoint.
> > Beginning, end, and entire middle of story.
> > 
> >> If you were to treat your readers with a greater consideration for
> >> their intellect, you might come across better.
> > 
> > A discerning intellect would have not sent this to me directly, would
> > have identified the aspects specified more accurately, and kept it on
> > list.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >> See also Edward Gibbon - Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire,
> >> chapter 2
> > 
> > We live in exactly those times, a classic example being played out
> > before our very eyes.
> > 
> > You currently just are making yourself look both arrogant and
> > ridiculous. 
> 
> In your perception.

Looking at the number of people who replied to tell you your attitude is
not welcome, I think it is a bit more than just my perception.

> > I guess this is why Andrew sent his reply just to you,
> > instead of giving you another shovel to dig with. 
> > 
> > I don't know what you are trying to achieve here, but I stand my point
> > : your lack of respect for others is not welcome here.
> 
> And I stand mine: respect is a quality that needs to be earned.

Not here. Not in the biggest part of the society. Respect is presumed,
and then is either confirmed or lost. Feel free to abide by the rules
you like at your home, but here the rules are not yours. If you're not
fine with these rules, it's the same as any private space: either remain
silent or leave.

> I see A plethora of others who grasp the opportunity to ascend their
> lecterns and preach, you being one of them, and this I can ignore, but
> if it continues, and then my inbox gets cluttered with direct
> communications of an incident I have long left in the rear vision
> mirror, you get what you earn. One poster delivered what _you_ earned,
> but there has obviously been no effort to reflect and philosophies of
> convenience hold sway.

Many times people let rude and aggressive tones and behaviours go,
because these very long threads where people remind to one that there
are rules to interact on these lists and that one tries to show that
he's smarter and rules don't apply to him are just boring for everyone.
But from time to time, it's required to remind to everyone that just
because we don't react all the time doesn't mean we think less.

But to be honest, I have no problem with not letting it go when people
react. Because there is a Code of Conduct in Debian and guidelines when
you post on a list, and since you're trying to waive both, I think it's
worth the trouble.

> [snip]

-- 
Pierre-Elliott Bécue
GPG: 9AE0 4D98 6400 E3B6 7528  F493 0D44 2664 1949 74

Re: Please be respectful

[Pierre-Elliott Bécue]

Le samedi 17 octobre 2020 à 19:06:35-0700, Weaver a écrit :
> On 18-10-2020 11:42, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
> > Le 17 octobre 2020 23:03:22 GMT+02:00, Weaver  a
> > écrit :
> 
> And now we go another step further: with double postings into my inbox.

That occurs when one do sent a mail to somebody and also to a list he's
subscribed to. As I learnt to delete duplicates, I'm pretty sure you'll
manage.

> Why don't you massage your petit ego requirements on somebody else's
> time.?
> I'm quite sure everybody here is as sick of it as I am.

I'm quite sure many people are sick of people behaving like bullies,
pretending to decide who gets or not to post and ask questions on a user
list and on what terms. If you don't want people to waste your time,
feel free not to reply and not to try imposing your opinion on a list
already regulated by guidelines you're actually trying to spit on.

There are plenty places on the internet where your behaviour would be
seen as excellence and "the way to do it". This corner is not one of
these. Feel free to either accept it or go ranting elsewhere.

-- 
Pierre-Elliott Bécue
GPG: 9AE0 4D98 6400 E3B6 7528  F493 0D44 2664 1949 74E2
It's far easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them.


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Please be respectful

[tomas]

On Sun, Oct 18, 2020 at 11:52:20AM +, Long Wind wrote:
>  it's foolish to argue with foolish peopleif i receive unpleasant message, i 
> just ignore it (keep quiet)

In general, this is a good strategy. Still, there are people
around who feel hurt by things and are too shy to speak up;
it's thinking of those that I do sometimes.

It's a fine line to walk: of course I only have my subjective
impression as a guide, and that may be wrong, so it's quite
possible that I'm being unjust when I speak up.

So I sincerely hope to be corrected in those case. That's the
only way to learn.

Cheers
 - t


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Please be respectful

[Christoph K.]

Hello Leslie,
hello Harry.

On Fri, 16 Oct 2020 16:46:42 -0500
Leslie Rhorer wrote :

> Until someone does earn respect, there is no reason anyone 
> should afford it them. It is utterly ridiculous to think
> everyone deserves respect.


On Fri, 16 Oct 2020 22:39:01 -0700
Weaver wrote :

> Some, in their retarded viewpoint, believe respect is something
> engendered by social position.
> Wrong!
> Social position is engendered by earned level of respect.


We're on a Debian mailing list here. Being respectful is part of the
Debian Code of Conduct which reflects the values of this community:


1. Be respectful

In a project the size of Debian, inevitably there will be people with
whom you may disagree, or find it difficult to cooperate. Accept that,
but even so, remain respectful. Disagreement is no excuse for poor
behaviour or personal attacks, and a community in which people feel
threatened is not a healthy community.

[...]

Source: https://www.debian.org/code_of_conduct


If both of you openly state that you oppose the idea of being respectful
with other people unless they have earned your respect (according to your
perception), you more or less directly state that you oppose the Debian
Code of Conduct.

Apart from that, both of you have broken a couple of rules from the
Mailing lists code of conduct: https://www.debian.org/MailingLists/

* Non-constructive [...] messages [...] are not welcome
* Do not use foul language; [...]
* Try not to flame; it is not polite.
* Use common sense all the time.

I hope some people will draw some meaningful consequences.

Best regards,
Christoph

Re: Please be respectful

[Michael uplawski]

Weaver:

> And I stand mine: respect is a quality that needs to be earned.

All living thing, and maybe more merit respect as a matter of fact.

Afterwards, you develop.

But societies change each one at any point in time adapts its rules to
the current understanding of abstract, arbitrary and deliberately
defined “values”.

You are in or you are out. You choose to be out and I wished that people
found a way to honor that fact.

You want to be handled this way, we shall comply.

Ω


-- 
GnuPG rsa4096 2020-09-08 [SC] [expire : 2022-09-08]
  B31591374C4824DE872841D27D857E5045D038F8
sub   rsa4096 2020-09-08 [E] [expire : 2022-09-08]

Re: Please be respectful

[Weaver]

On 18-10-2020 11:42, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
> Le 17 octobre 2020 23:03:22 GMT+02:00, Weaver  a
> écrit :

And now we go another step further: with double postings into my inbox.
Why don't you massage your petit ego requirements on somebody else's
time.?
I'm quite sure everybody here is as sick of it as I am.

 
>> On 18-10-2020 00:53, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 10:39:01PM -0700, Weaver wrote:
>> On 17-10-2020 15:05, Michael uplawski wrote:
>> Leslie Rhorer:
>> Until someone does earn respect, there is no reason anyone
>> should afford it them. It is utterly ridiculous to think everyone
>> deserves respect.
>>
>> This is where you are excluding yourself from the human community.
>> Face
>> it. Live with it. *We* will be fine, anyway.
> 
> Rubbish!
> 
> Tone not helpful here on either side.
> 
> Rubbish is rubbish
> Some may see a point in dressing it up as otherwise.
> I don't.
> 
>>> There are certain qualities which must be extended before you are
>>> worthy
>>> of receiving them, trust, loyalty, to mention a couple, but you
>>> can
>>> throw respect in there also, along with one or two others.
>>> I have to earn the respect of every child I meet, and maintain the
>>> standard every time I encounter that child in the future.
>>> Some, in their retarded viewpoint, believe respect is something
>>> engendered by social position.
>>
>> Retarded is not a helpful term here or, indeed, anywhere.
> 
> Retarded is retarded.
> You seem to prefer to believe it is aimed at an individual, when it is
> clearly applied to a viewpoint.
> 
>>> Wrong!
>>> Social position is engendered by earned level of respect.
>>> `excluding yourself from the human community', what a load of
>>> puerile
>>> ignorance!
>>
>> Puerile here is also not helpful. Considered, constructive language
>> which advances a thought through viewpoint is preferable.
>> Another way of putting it "never argue with an idiot on the
>> Internet.
>> After a couple of rounds, a dispassionate observer will not be able
>> to tell who's who"
> 
> Puerile is puerile.
> `Immature, especially in being silly or trivial; childish'.
> The terminology applies: employ it.
> `Considered, constructive language' - is language which communicates
> effectively.
> `which advances a thought through viewpoint' - Pseudo-intellectual
> waffle! 
> You know another method?
> Observation is dependent on conditioned viewpoint.
> Beginning, end, and entire middle of story.
> 
>> If you were to treat your readers with a greater consideration for
>> their intellect, you might come across better.
> 
> A discerning intellect would have not sent this to me directly, would
> have identified the aspects specified more accurately, and kept it on
> list.
> 
> 
> 
>> See also Edward Gibbon - Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire,
>> chapter 2
> 
> We live in exactly those times, a classic example being played out
> before our very eyes.
> 
> You currently just are making yourself look both arrogant and
> ridiculous. I guess this is why Andrew sent his reply just to you,
> instead of giving you another shovel to dig with. 
> 
> I don't know what you are trying to achieve here, but I stand my point
> : your lack of respect for others is not welcome here. 
> 
> Regards. 
> --
> Pierre-Elliott Bécue

-- 
`Religion is regarded by the common people as true,
by the wise as false,
and by the rulers as useful'.

— Lucius Annæus Seneca.

Terrorism, the new religion.

Registered Linux User: 554515

Re: Please be respectful

[Weaver]

On 18-10-2020 11:42, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
> Le 17 octobre 2020 23:03:22 GMT+02:00, Weaver  a
> écrit :
> 
>> On 18-10-2020 00:53, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 10:39:01PM -0700, Weaver wrote:
>> On 17-10-2020 15:05, Michael uplawski wrote:
>> Leslie Rhorer:
>> Until someone does earn respect, there is no reason anyone
>> should afford it them. It is utterly ridiculous to think everyone
>> deserves respect.
>>
>> This is where you are excluding yourself from the human community.
>> Face
>> it. Live with it. *We* will be fine, anyway.
> 
> Rubbish!
> 
> Tone not helpful here on either side.
> 
> Rubbish is rubbish
> Some may see a point in dressing it up as otherwise.
> I don't.
> 
>>> There are certain qualities which must be extended before you are
>>> worthy
>>> of receiving them, trust, loyalty, to mention a couple, but you
>>> can
>>> throw respect in there also, along with one or two others.
>>> I have to earn the respect of every child I meet, and maintain the
>>> standard every time I encounter that child in the future.
>>> Some, in their retarded viewpoint, believe respect is something
>>> engendered by social position.
>>
>> Retarded is not a helpful term here or, indeed, anywhere.
> 
> Retarded is retarded.
> You seem to prefer to believe it is aimed at an individual, when it is
> clearly applied to a viewpoint.
> 
>>> Wrong!
>>> Social position is engendered by earned level of respect.
>>> `excluding yourself from the human community', what a load of
>>> puerile
>>> ignorance!
>>
>> Puerile here is also not helpful. Considered, constructive language
>> which advances a thought through viewpoint is preferable.
>> Another way of putting it "never argue with an idiot on the
>> Internet.
>> After a couple of rounds, a dispassionate observer will not be able
>> to tell who's who"
> 
> Puerile is puerile.
> `Immature, especially in being silly or trivial; childish'.
> The terminology applies: employ it.
> `Considered, constructive language' - is language which communicates
> effectively.
> `which advances a thought through viewpoint' - Pseudo-intellectual
> waffle! 
> You know another method?
> Observation is dependent on conditioned viewpoint.
> Beginning, end, and entire middle of story.
> 
>> If you were to treat your readers with a greater consideration for
>> their intellect, you might come across better.
> 
> A discerning intellect would have not sent this to me directly, would
> have identified the aspects specified more accurately, and kept it on
> list.
> 
> 
> 
>> See also Edward Gibbon - Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire,
>> chapter 2
> 
> We live in exactly those times, a classic example being played out
> before our very eyes.
> 
> You currently just are making yourself look both arrogant and
> ridiculous. 

In your perception.

I guess this is why Andrew sent his reply just to you,
> instead of giving you another shovel to dig with. 
> 
> I don't know what you are trying to achieve here, but I stand my point
> : your lack of respect for others is not welcome here.

And I stand mine: respect is a quality that needs to be earned.
I see A plethora of others who grasp the opportunity to ascend their
lecterns and preach, you being one of them, and this I can ignore, but
if it continues, and then my inbox gets cluttered with direct
communications of an incident I have long left in the rear vision
mirror, you get what you earn. One poster delivered what _you_ earned,
but there has obviously been no effort to reflect and philosophies of
convenience hold sway.
Leave the subject alone.

-- 
`Religion is regarded by the common people as true,
by the wise as false,
and by the rulers as useful'.

— Lucius Annæus Seneca.

Terrorism, the new religion.

Registered Linux User: 554515

Re: Please be respectful

[Pierre-Elliott Bécue]

Le 17 octobre 2020 23:03:22 GMT+02:00, Weaver  a écrit :
>On 18-10-2020 00:53, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 10:39:01PM -0700, Weaver wrote:
>>> On 17-10-2020 15:05, Michael uplawski wrote:
>>> > Leslie Rhorer:
>>> >> Until someone does earn respect, there is no reason anyone
>>> >> should afford it them.  It is utterly ridiculous to think
>everyone
>>> >> deserves respect.
>>> >
>>> > This is where you are excluding yourself from the human community.
>Face
>>> > it. Live with it. *We* will be fine, anyway.
>>>
>>> Rubbish!
>> 
>> Tone not helpful here on either side.
>
>Rubbish is rubbish
>Some may see a point in dressing it up as otherwise.
>I don't.
>
> 
>>> There are certain qualities which must be extended before you are
>worthy
>>> of receiving them, trust, loyalty, to mention a couple, but you can
>>> throw respect in there also, along with one or two others.
>>> I have to earn the respect of every child I meet, and maintain the
>>> standard every time I encounter that child in the future.
>>> Some, in their retarded viewpoint, believe respect is something
>>> engendered by social position.
>> 
>> Retarded is not a helpful term here or, indeed, anywhere.
>
>Retarded is retarded.
>You seem to prefer to believe it is aimed at an individual, when it is
>clearly applied to a viewpoint.
>
> 
>>> Wrong!
>>> Social position is engendered by earned level of respect.
>>> `excluding yourself from the human community', what a load of
>puerile
>>> ignorance!
>>>
>> 
>> Puerile here is also not helpful. Considered, constructive language
>> which advances a thought through viewpoint is preferable.
>> Another way of putting it "never argue with an idiot on the Internet.
>> After a couple of rounds, a dispassionate observer will not be able
>>  to tell who's who"
>
>Puerile is puerile.
>`Immature, especially in being silly or trivial; childish'.
>The terminology applies: employ it.
>`Considered, constructive language' - is language which communicates
>effectively.
>`which advances a thought through viewpoint' - Pseudo-intellectual
>waffle! 
>You know another method?
>Observation is dependent on conditioned viewpoint.
>Beginning, end, and entire middle of story.
>
> 
>> If you were to treat your readers with a greater consideration for
>> their intellect, you  might come across better.
>
>
>A discerning intellect would have not sent this to me directly, would
>have identified the aspects specified more accurately, and kept it on
>list.
>
>
>
>> See also Edward Gibbon - Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire,
>chapter 2
>
>We live in exactly those times, a classic example being played out
>before our very eyes.
>
>-- 
>`Religion is regarded by the common people as true,
>by the wise as false,
>and by the rulers as useful'.
>
>— Lucius Annæus Seneca.
>
>Terrorism, the new religion.
>
>Registered Linux User: 554515

You currently just are making yourself look both arrogant and ridiculous. I 
guess this is why Andrew sent his reply just to you, instead of giving you 
another shovel to dig with. 

I don't know what you are trying to achieve here, but I stand my point : your 
lack of respect for others is not welcome here. 

Regards. 
--
Pierre-Elliott Bécue

Re: Please be respectful

[Weaver]

On 18-10-2020 00:53, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 10:39:01PM -0700, Weaver wrote:
>> On 17-10-2020 15:05, Michael uplawski wrote:
>> > Leslie Rhorer:
>> >> Until someone does earn respect, there is no reason anyone
>> >> should afford it them.  It is utterly ridiculous to think everyone
>> >> deserves respect.
>> >
>> > This is where you are excluding yourself from the human community. Face
>> > it. Live with it. *We* will be fine, anyway.
>>
>> Rubbish!
> 
> Tone not helpful here on either side.

Rubbish is rubbish
Some may see a point in dressing it up as otherwise.
I don't.

 
>> There are certain qualities which must be extended before you are worthy
>> of receiving them, trust, loyalty, to mention a couple, but you can
>> throw respect in there also, along with one or two others.
>> I have to earn the respect of every child I meet, and maintain the
>> standard every time I encounter that child in the future.
>> Some, in their retarded viewpoint, believe respect is something
>> engendered by social position.
> 
> Retarded is not a helpful term here or, indeed, anywhere.

Retarded is retarded.
You seem to prefer to believe it is aimed at an individual, when it is
clearly applied to a viewpoint.

 
>> Wrong!
>> Social position is engendered by earned level of respect.
>> `excluding yourself from the human community', what a load of puerile
>> ignorance!
>>
> 
> Puerile here is also not helpful. Considered, constructive language
> which advances a thought through viewpoint is preferable.
> Another way of putting it "never argue with an idiot on the Internet.
> After a couple of rounds, a dispassionate observer will not be able
>  to tell who's who"

Puerile is puerile.
`Immature, especially in being silly or trivial; childish'.
The terminology applies: employ it.
`Considered, constructive language' - is language which communicates
effectively.
`which advances a thought through viewpoint' - Pseudo-intellectual
waffle! 
You know another method?
Observation is dependent on conditioned viewpoint.
Beginning, end, and entire middle of story.

 
> If you were to treat your readers with a greater consideration for
> their intellect, you  might come across better.


A discerning intellect would have not sent this to me directly, would
have identified the aspects specified more accurately, and kept it on
list.



> See also Edward Gibbon - Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 2

We live in exactly those times, a classic example being played out
before our very eyes.

-- 
`Religion is regarded by the common people as true,
by the wise as false,
and by the rulers as useful'.

— Lucius Annæus Seneca.

Terrorism, the new religion.

Registered Linux User: 554515

Re: Please be respectful

[Weaver]

On 17-10-2020 16:59, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> On Vi, 16 oct 20, 16:46:42, Leslie Rhorer wrote:
>>
>> On 10/16/2020 4:57 AM, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
>>
>> > Feel free to ignore """lazy""" people from now on, but don't be
>> > irrespectful to them.
>> >
>> > You have no right to, and they don't deserve it.
>>
>>  There is no such word - or concept - as irrespectful.
> 
> Please excuse us non-native English speakers for such mistakes. As far 
> as I can tell Pierre-Elliot meant "rude".
> 
>> The point you were
>> apparently trying to make, however, is just completely wrong.  I, and anyone
>> else, have every right to reserve my respect from whomever I choose.
>> Respect is *EARNED*. It is not a right and it is not a privilege.  Until
>> someone does earn respect, there is no reason anyone should afford it them.
>> It is utterly ridiculous to think everyone deserves respect.  If it is
>> afforded to everyone, then it becomes totally worthless.
> 
> This could be understood that in your opinion it is ok to be rude to a 
> person unless that person has somehow earned your respect.
> 
> Is this what you meant?

I think this might be classified as a `qualified' interpretation.
This was not the assertion put forward.
Nowhere is this stated.
The property put forward is `respect'.
Nowhere is it stated that it's O.K. to be rude to somebody because they
don't respect you.
What _I_ would put forward is it's O.K. to be rude to somebody who has
imposed rudeness upon you.
But I'm generally better at it.
Cheers!

Harry
> 
> Kind regards,
> Andrei

-- 
`Religion is regarded by the common people as true,
by the wise as false,
and by the rulers as useful'.

— Lucius Annæus Seneca.

Terrorism, the new religion.

Registered Linux User: 554515

Re: Please be respectful

[tomas]

On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 04:46:42PM -0500, Leslie Rhorer wrote:
> 
> 
> On 10/16/2020 4:57 AM, Pierre-Elliott B�cue wrote:

[...]

>   This is nonsense.  Whenever I  forced to do something, or worse
> yet, prevented from doing something by a consensus of incompetent
> individuals, I have every right to complain.

... and when *you* get to decide who is to be "a consensus of
incompetent individuals" is the point where we part ways.

Sorry, I'm a command line junkie myself, and I try to seduce
people to try that anytime I get a chance, but your stance above
can only be characterised as arrogant.

[...]

> >Feel free to ignore """lazy""" people from now on, but don't be
> >irrespectful to them.
> >
> >You have no right to, and they don't deserve it.
> 
>   There is no such word - or concept - as irrespectful [...]

C'mon. This is a mailing list in English, but its basis is very
international. You get to enjoy the fact that other people try
to adapt to your language as well as they can.

In this context, Postel's law [1] should apply (not only in
language things, mind you).

Go fix your error correction algorithm. A new prefix mapping (e.g.
i -> dis, with the usual phonetic embellishments) might go a long
way. 

Cheer

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postel%27s_law
 - t


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Please be respectful

[Andrei POPESCU]

On Vi, 16 oct 20, 16:46:42, Leslie Rhorer wrote:
> 
> On 10/16/2020 4:57 AM, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
> 
> > Feel free to ignore """lazy""" people from now on, but don't be
> > irrespectful to them.
> > 
> > You have no right to, and they don't deserve it.
> 
>   There is no such word - or concept - as irrespectful.

Please excuse us non-native English speakers for such mistakes. As far 
as I can tell Pierre-Elliot meant "rude".

> The point you were
> apparently trying to make, however, is just completely wrong.  I, and anyone
> else, have every right to reserve my respect from whomever I choose.
> Respect is *EARNED*. It is not a right and it is not a privilege.  Until
> someone does earn respect, there is no reason anyone should afford it them.
> It is utterly ridiculous to think everyone deserves respect.  If it is
> afforded to everyone, then it becomes totally worthless.

This could be understood that in your opinion it is ok to be rude to a 
person unless that person has somehow earned your respect.

Is this what you meant?

Kind regards,
Andrei
-- 
http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Please be respectful

[Weaver]

On 17-10-2020 15:05, Michael uplawski wrote:
> Leslie Rhorer:
>> Until someone does earn respect, there is no reason anyone
>> should afford it them.  It is utterly ridiculous to think everyone
>> deserves respect.
> 
> This is where you are excluding yourself from the human community. Face
> it. Live with it. *We* will be fine, anyway.

Rubbish!
There are certain qualities which must be extended before you are worthy
of receiving them, trust, loyalty, to mention a couple, but you can
throw respect in there also, along with one or two others.
I have to earn the respect of every child I meet, and maintain the
standard every time I encounter that child in the future.
Some, in their retarded viewpoint, believe respect is something
engendered by social position.
Wrong!
Social position is engendered by earned level of respect.
`excluding yourself from the human community', what a load of puerile
ignorance!

-- 
`Religion is regarded by the common people as true,
by the wise as false,
and by the rulers as useful'.

— Lucius Annæus Seneca.

Terrorism, the new religion.

Registered Linux User: 554515

Re: Please be respectful

[Michael uplawski]

Leslie Rhorer:
> Until someone does earn respect, there is no reason anyone 
> should afford it them.  It is utterly ridiculous to think everyone 
> deserves respect. 

This is where you are excluding yourself from the human community. Face
it. Live with it. *We* will be fine, anyway.

Cheerio

(I like your topic here).

-- 
GnuPG rsa4096 2020-09-08 [SC] [expire : 2022-09-08]
  B31591374C4824DE872841D27D857E5045D038F8
sub   rsa4096 2020-09-08 [E] [expire : 2022-09-08]

Re: Please be respectful

[Leslie Rhorer]

On 10/16/2020 4:57 AM, Pierre-Elliott B�cue wrote:

The point - or my point anyway - is rather than seeking to tack on a 
whole
bunch of poorly considered features to a poorly considered fundamental
utility, well considered, powerful, highly configurable solutions such as
"find" should be encouraged.


And no one said that one couldn't recommend using a command line tool.
But the fact there is a command line tool doesn't make the need of the
same feature in a GUI file manager absurd or irrelevant. And your
opinion on that matter is irrelevant as you are not the one asking for
help.


	This is nonsense.  Whenever I  forced to do something, or worse yet, 
prevented from doing something by a consensus of incompetent 
individuals, I have every right to complain.



The debian-user list is a communication medium where each and any user
of Debian, from "newbie" to "expert" to ask questions and share their
knowledge about the project and its features.


Why talk about Debian, irrespective of what list this is, when a more
powerful, simpler, more fundamental utility is available on *ALL* distros?


Being "irrespective" of the list is completely irrelevant to the matter,
as this very list is a Debian one for people needing help about Debian.
Not just the ones you think have a right to ask for help but all of
them.


	Your saying so does not make it so.  The simple fact is a solution 
which works for 100,000 people is superior to that which only serves 500 
people, *PROVIDED* the 500 are included in the 100,000.  Very, very few 
distros fail to provide the find utility.  It just does not get any more 
universal.


	I *NEVER* suggested anyone should not have the right to ask a question. 
 Indeed, everyone should be encouraged to ask questions.  Everyone is 
also entitled to an opinion and to express it.




This fact litteraly makes the whole remains of your mail moot, and I'll
henceforth refrain from answering to it.


Your "fact" is in error.



Feel free to ignore """lazy""" people from now on, but don't be
irrespectful to them.

You have no right to, and they don't deserve it.


	There is no such word - or concept - as irrespectful.  The point you 
were apparently trying to make, however, is just completely wrong.  I, 
and anyone else, have every right to reserve my respect from whomever I 
choose.  Respect is *EARNED*. It is not a right and it is not a 
privilege.  Until someone does earn respect, there is no reason anyone 
should afford it them.  It is utterly ridiculous to think everyone 
deserves respect.  If it is afforded to everyone, then it becomes 
totally worthless.

Re: Please be respectful

[Pierre-Elliott Bécue]

Le jeudi 15 octobre 2020 à 19:10:00-0500, Leslie Rhorer a écrit :
> On 10/15/2020 5:05 PM, Pierre-Elliott B�cue wrote:
> > Le mercredi 14 octobre 2020 � 02:12:45-0700, Weaver a �crit�:
> > > On 14-10-2020 18:30, Christoph K. wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 13 Oct 2020 23:06:55 -0700
> > > > Weaver wrote :
> > > > 
> > > > > > "as I learnt to read years ago,"
> > > > > It's appropriate sarcasm.
> > > > 
> > > > Disagreed.
> > > > It's simply disrespectful.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > > For those who require spoon feeding:
> > > > 
> > > > As is this comment, too.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Sarcasm can be fun sometimes, but I believe it's no appropriate way to
> > > > communicate on debian mailing lists. It can lead to misunderstandings 
> > > > and
> > > > people being hurt, apart from making a bad impressions on others reading
> > > > this list.
> > > > 
> > > > Please re-read the Debian Code of Conduct and consider being more 
> > > > polite:
> > > > https://www.debian.org/code_of_conduct
> > > 
> > > Being polite is a standard that has to apply to all.
> > > I consider the original post not to be.
> > > To me I see an outstanding example of laziness from somebody who
> > > obviously needs no consideration in the accessibility department.
> > > Scrolling an alphabetically arranged file system doesn't even qualify as
> > > trivial.
> > 
> > When the displayed file list contains hundreds or thousands of
> > files/directories, and you don't know the first letters of their name,
> > looking for a substring or a fuzzy pattern by hand with your eyes and
> > via scrolling qualifies as not-at-all trivial.
> 
>   True enough, but then the same is true of a list of badly associated 
> names,
> if not moreso.
> 
> > > It can be accomplished as quickly as you can move your hand.
> > > The use of find and/or locate will dig up anything, no matter how deeply
> > > hidden in a plethora of directories.
> > 
> > The question is about a GUI file manager with a specific feature, not
> > about a command line way of doing it.
> 
>   The point - or my point anyway - is rather than seeking to tack on a 
> whole
> bunch of poorly considered features to a poorly considered fundamental
> utility, well considered, powerful, highly configurable solutions such as
> "find" should be encouraged.

And no one said that one couldn't recommend using a command line tool.
But the fact there is a command line tool doesn't make the need of the
same feature in a GUI file manager absurd or irrelevant. And your
opinion on that matter is irrelevant as you are not the one asking for
help.

> > The debian-user list is a communication medium where each and any user
> > of Debian, from "newbie" to "expert" to ask questions and share their
> > knowledge about the project and its features.
> 
>   Why talk about Debian, irrespective of what list this is, when a more
> powerful, simpler, more fundamental utility is available on *ALL* distros?

Being "irrespective" of the list is completely irrelevant to the matter,
as this very list is a Debian one for people needing help about Debian.
Not just the ones you think have a right to ask for help but all of
them.

This fact litteraly makes the whole remains of your mail moot, and I'll
henceforth refrain from answering to it.

Feel free to ignore """lazy""" people from now on, but don't be
irrespectful to them.

You have no right to, and they don't deserve it.

-- 
Pierre-Elliott Bécue
GPG: 9AE0 4D98 6400 E3B6 7528  F493 0D44 2664 1949 74E2
It's far easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them.


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Please be respectful

[Leslie Rhorer]

On 10/15/2020 5:05 PM, Pierre-Elliott B�cue wrote:

Le mercredi 14 octobre 2020 � 02:12:45-0700, Weaver a �crit�:

On 14-10-2020 18:30, Christoph K. wrote:

On Tue, 13 Oct 2020 23:06:55 -0700
Weaver wrote :


"as I learnt to read years ago,"

It's appropriate sarcasm.


Disagreed.
It's simply disrespectful.



For those who require spoon feeding:


As is this comment, too.


Sarcasm can be fun sometimes, but I believe it's no appropriate way to
communicate on debian mailing lists. It can lead to misunderstandings and
people being hurt, apart from making a bad impressions on others reading
this list.

Please re-read the Debian Code of Conduct and consider being more polite:
https://www.debian.org/code_of_conduct


Being polite is a standard that has to apply to all.
I consider the original post not to be.
To me I see an outstanding example of laziness from somebody who
obviously needs no consideration in the accessibility department.
Scrolling an alphabetically arranged file system doesn't even qualify as
trivial.


When the displayed file list contains hundreds or thousands of
files/directories, and you don't know the first letters of their name,
looking for a substring or a fuzzy pattern by hand with your eyes and
via scrolling qualifies as not-at-all trivial.


	True enough, but then the same is true of a list of badly associated 
names, if not moreso.



It can be accomplished as quickly as you can move your hand.
The use of find and/or locate will dig up anything, no matter how deeply
hidden in a plethora of directories.


The question is about a GUI file manager with a specific feature, not
about a command line way of doing it.


	The point - or my point anyway - is rather than seeking to tack on a 
whole bunch of poorly considered features to a poorly considered 
fundamental utility, well considered, powerful, highly configurable 
solutions such as "find" should be encouraged.




The debian-user list is a communication medium where each and any user
of Debian, from "newbie" to "expert" to ask questions and share their
knowledge about the project and its features.


	Why talk about Debian, irrespective of what list this is, when a more 
powerful, simpler, more fundamental utility is available on *ALL* distros?



While many users are comfortable with "posting bugs" and "filing
issues", some are not, and are more used to ask for help. It's not


Your point escapes me.


laziness, it's a state of mind. And you probably have relatives who do
the same.


	Again, your point somewhat escapes me.  Laziness is a state of mind, so 
your statement is simply nonsense.  It is also in many cases 
fundamentally untrue that the outlook is not a result of laziness. 
Often it most certainly is.  Sometimes it is not a result of laziness. 
Regardless, it is a limited and weak outlook.



If you have troubles with such users


	I have trouble with such attitudes, particularly when it winds up badly 
impacting by ability to get things done.  Every year I see Debian being 
degraded by a desire to cater to attitudes which should not be 
countenanced, let alone accommodated.


, you can just ignore their mails

and answer to the things that you feel are interesting for you. This
would spare you some time, and a part of the Community wouldn't feel
driven out by another one.


	I am in no way concerned by who may or may not be driven out, and 
neither do these people for who you and others seem to have so much 
consideration.  They want what they want, regardless of how foolish it 
might be or how it impacts those who want to have maximal control over 
their systems.



Being eager to live in a world where everyone is not the same, and where
people feel like using the Distribution I contribute to, I'd rather you
not chosing for me which user has a right to ask questions here.


	Everyone should have a right to ask questions and to express their 
opinions.  That includes Weaver, and if someone gets their feeling hurt 
over it, that is just tough.  Do I think he too the best tack for 
expressing himself?  No I do not.  That in and of itself in no way 
either validates nor invalidates his point of view, which despite his 
rather poor means of expression nonetheless has a valid core.


	Catering to noobs in any other than a very perfunctory fashion is quite 
simply a very, very bad idea.  Catering to them at the expense of more 
experienced uses is simply and completely unacceptable.  So, frankly, is 
catering to the unintelligent at the expense of the more intelligent.


	I am not saying the "elite" are any more important than the "unwashed" 
as it were, but they are no less important, either, and certainly not 
merely due to their relative paucity of numbers.


	My main point, however, is it is not impossible, or indeed even 
difficult to cater to both needs.  All it requires is some thought and 
preparation.  I will give an example.  Suppose a developer is creating a 
utility called Frumplesticks.  Now, he can

Re: Please be respectful

[Pierre-Elliott Bécue]

Le mercredi 14 octobre 2020 à 02:12:45-0700, Weaver a écrit :
> On 14-10-2020 18:30, Christoph K. wrote:
> > On Tue, 13 Oct 2020 23:06:55 -0700
> > Weaver wrote :
> >
> >> > "as I learnt to read years ago,"
> >> It's appropriate sarcasm.
> >
> > Disagreed.
> > It's simply disrespectful.
> >
> >
> >> For those who require spoon feeding:
> >
> > As is this comment, too.
> >
> >
> > Sarcasm can be fun sometimes, but I believe it's no appropriate way to
> > communicate on debian mailing lists. It can lead to misunderstandings and
> > people being hurt, apart from making a bad impressions on others reading
> > this list.
> >
> > Please re-read the Debian Code of Conduct and consider being more polite:
> > https://www.debian.org/code_of_conduct
>
> Being polite is a standard that has to apply to all.
> I consider the original post not to be.
> To me I see an outstanding example of laziness from somebody who
> obviously needs no consideration in the accessibility department.
> Scrolling an alphabetically arranged file system doesn't even qualify as
> trivial.

When the displayed file list contains hundreds or thousands of
files/directories, and you don't know the first letters of their name,
looking for a substring or a fuzzy pattern by hand with your eyes and
via scrolling qualifies as not-at-all trivial.

> It can be accomplished as quickly as you can move your hand.
> The use of find and/or locate will dig up anything, no matter how deeply
> hidden in a plethora of directories.

The question is about a GUI file manager with a specific feature, not
about a command line way of doing it.

> [snip]

The debian-user list is a communication medium where each and any user
of Debian, from "newbie" to "expert" to ask questions and share their
knowledge about the project and its features.

While many users are comfortable with "posting bugs" and "filing
issues", some are not, and are more used to ask for help. It's not
laziness, it's a state of mind. And you probably have relatives who do
the same.

If you have troubles with such users, you can just ignore their mails
and answer to the things that you feel are interesting for you. This
would spare you some time, and a part of the Community wouldn't feel
driven out by another one.

Being eager to live in a world where everyone is not the same, and where
people feel like using the Distribution I contribute to, I'd rather you
not chosing for me which user has a right to ask questions here.

Kind regards.

-- 
Pierre-Elliott Bécue
GPG: 9AE0 4D98 6400 E3B6 7528  F493 0D44 2664 1949 74E2
It's far easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them.


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Please be respectful

[Peter Ehlert]

ditto

On 10/15/20 6:58 AM, gru...@mailfence.com wrote:

Reading this thread reinforces just how old I am
The whole world seems to be wearing their feelings on the sleeve


On Thu, 15 Oct 2020, Jonathan Dowland wrote:


Weaver,

On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 02:12:45AM -0700, Weaver wrote:

Being polite is a standard that has to apply to all.


And indeed it does. Even if the OP was not being polite, you are not 
suddenly given a free pass to write a rude reply. I was really 
disappointed to see your reply because, as Kaye points out, that kind 
of attitude reflects poorly on all of us. Please, if you haven't 
something constructive to offer, just don't post at all.



I consider the original post not to be.


Hopefully it's now clear to you that you are mistaken since the OP's 
requirement is shared by several others.


Kaye,

I use Nemo and at least out-of-the-box, it does not do what you want.
From what I recall GNOME's Nautilus file manager might do. However, at 
least by default, Nautilus performs a recursive search for all paths 
that match under the current directory when you start typing to 
search.  For me, this is a blocker to using Nautilus (I could not 
risk, say, confidential HR documents flashing up when a colleague was 
in front of my screen. Although that's not going to happen any time 
soon)


The feature you want is sometimes described as "fuzzy searching". The 
command-line tool "fzf" does it, although it's a grep-like tool, not 
a file manager. There are plugins for Vim to do the same thing too 
(likewise, not a file manager). But perhaps looking for fuzzy 
searching as a feature will help.



Best wishes

--

Please don't CC me, I am subscribed to the list.

Jonathan Dowland
https://jmtd.net

Re: Please be respectful

[Felmon Davis]

On Thu, 15 Oct 2020, gru...@mailfence.com wrote:


Reading this thread reinforces just how old I am
The whole world seems to be wearing their feelings on the sleeve


I doubt it's age-related; many feel under threat for various reasons 
though maybe we don't always pick apt targets or choose apt remedies.


--
Felmon Davis

Verbum sat sapienti.

Re: Please be respectful

[grumpy]

Reading this thread reinforces just how old I am
The whole world seems to be wearing their feelings on the sleeve


On Thu, 15 Oct 2020, Jonathan Dowland wrote:


Weaver,

On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 02:12:45AM -0700, Weaver wrote:

Being polite is a standard that has to apply to all.


And indeed it does. Even if the OP was not being polite, you are not suddenly 
given a free pass to write a rude reply. I was really disappointed to see 
your reply because, as Kaye points out, that kind of attitude reflects poorly 
on all of us. Please, if you haven't something constructive to offer, just 
don't post at all.



I consider the original post not to be.


Hopefully it's now clear to you that you are mistaken since the OP's 
requirement is shared by several others.


Kaye,

I use Nemo and at least out-of-the-box, it does not do what you want. 
From what I recall GNOME's Nautilus file manager might do. However, at 
least by default, Nautilus performs a recursive search for all paths that 
match under the current directory when you start typing to search.  For me, 
this is a blocker to using Nautilus (I could not risk, say, confidential HR 
documents flashing up when a colleague was in front of my screen. Although 
that's not going to happen any time soon)


The feature you want is sometimes described as "fuzzy searching". The 
command-line tool "fzf" does it, although it's a grep-like tool, not a file 
manager. There are plugins for Vim to do the same thing too (likewise, not a 
file manager). But perhaps looking for fuzzy searching as a feature will 
help.



Best wishes

--

Please don't CC me, I am subscribed to the list.

Jonathan Dowland
https://jmtd.net

Re: Please be respectful

[Jonathan Dowland]

Weaver,

On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 02:12:45AM -0700, Weaver wrote:

Being polite is a standard that has to apply to all.


And indeed it does. Even if the OP was not being polite, you are not 
suddenly given a free pass to write a rude reply. I was really 
disappointed to see your reply because, as Kaye points out, that kind of 
attitude reflects poorly on all of us. Please, if you haven't something 
constructive to offer, just don't post at all.



I consider the original post not to be.


Hopefully it's now clear to you that you are mistaken since the OP's 
requirement is shared by several others.


Kaye,

I use Nemo and at least out-of-the-box, it does not do what you want.  
From what I recall GNOME's Nautilus file manager might do. However, at 
least by default, Nautilus performs a recursive search for all paths 
that match under the current directory when you start typing to search.  
For me, this is a blocker to using Nautilus (I could not risk, say, 
confidential HR documents flashing up when a colleague was in front of 
my screen. Although that's not going to happen any time soon)


The feature you want is sometimes described as "fuzzy searching". The 
command-line tool "fzf" does it, although it's a grep-like tool, not a 
file manager. There are plugins for Vim to do the same thing too 
(likewise, not a file manager). But perhaps looking for fuzzy searching 
as a feature will help.



Best wishes

--

Please don't CC me, I am subscribed to the list.

Jonathan Dowland
https://jmtd.net

Re: Please be respectful

[Christoph K.]

Hello Harry,

thanks for your answer.

On Wed, 14 Oct 2020 02:12:45 -0700
Weaver wrote :

> Being polite is a standard that has to apply to all.

Agreed.


> I consider the original post not to be.

I do believe it could have been "more considerate",
but it didn't "cross my line", which your post did.
That's why I took the time to write the "please be respectful" email.

My main point of criticism is that independently of the original post,
it's a bad idea to escalate the situation by being sarcastic.
I prefer to directly confront the poster with the problem (as I'm doing
in this case) and ask for a different communication style.


> To me I see an outstanding example of laziness ...

I guess that's where the main clash is.

Sometimes I find myself thinking the same way about what other people do.

But after some experiences of being nasty with other people, ruining
relationships for almost nothing, I've come to the conclusion that "Assume
good faith" as mentioned in the Debian Code of Conduct is a much better
strategy to deal with issues of that kind.

In many cases I've often found that my initial judgement (he's lazy,
nobody needs that feature, etc.) was wrong and it was a good idea not to
express my opinion.
In other cases I find myself to be right. Usually there's no need to
point to that. People expose their faults (lazyness, etc.) themselves -
sooner or later.
Sometimes I support them doing so with polite questions ;-)

Best regards,
Christoph

Re: Please be respectful

[Thomas Pircher]

Weaver wrote:
> To me I see an outstanding example of laziness from somebody who
> obviously needs no consideration in the accessibility department.

Hi Harry,

I really hope you are in a minority with this opinion, and hopefully,
re-reading the original post you might come to a different conclusion
about the OP's request.

> Scrolling an alphabetically arranged file system doesn't even qualify as
> trivial.

The OP asked for a suggestion of a file browser with a certain feature.
The feature is to filter/limit the displayed files, roughly equivalent
to a shell command like `ls *j*`. I do this type of things all the time.
This is a perfectly reasonable thing to do, especially when dealing with
lots of files, and when you don't know the full name of a file.

> The use of find and/or locate will dig up anything, no matter how deeply
> hidden in a plethora of directories.

That is true, find and locate are very powerful tools, and worth
learning. However, they are specialized tools which need some form of
in-depth knowledge, and as such, they not always the first choice in
every situation for every user.

Cheers,
Thomas

Re: Please be respectful

[Weaver]

On 14-10-2020 18:30, Christoph K. wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Oct 2020 23:06:55 -0700
> Weaver wrote :
> 
>> > "as I learnt to read years ago,"
>> It's appropriate sarcasm.
> 
> Disagreed.
> It's simply disrespectful.
> 
> 
>> For those who require spoon feeding:
> 
> As is this comment, too.
> 
> 
> Sarcasm can be fun sometimes, but I believe it's no appropriate way to
> communicate on debian mailing lists. It can lead to misunderstandings and
> people being hurt, apart from making a bad impressions on others reading
> this list.
> 
> Please re-read the Debian Code of Conduct and consider being more polite:
> https://www.debian.org/code_of_conduct

Being polite is a standard that has to apply to all.
I consider the original post not to be.
To me I see an outstanding example of laziness from somebody who
obviously needs no consideration in the accessibility department.
Scrolling an alphabetically arranged file system doesn't even qualify as
trivial.
It can be accomplished as quickly as you can move your hand.
The use of find and/or locate will dig up anything, no matter how deeply
hidden in a plethora of directories.
If that is insufficient and the standard has to be established in an
instance where an iron lung is in use, direct a bug report to the
appropriate quarter, which I have already supplied, where they can put
it at the far end of a list behind things that really need doing.
Kind regards,

Harry. 

-- 
`Religion is regarded by the common people as true,
by the wise as false,
and by the rulers as useful'.

— Lucius Annæus Seneca.

Terrorism, the new religion.

Registered Linux User: 554515