Minimum standard of decency, was: Amendment: GFDL is compatible with DFSG

Roger Leigh > I think that this behaviour, as well as that on other lists in the > recent past, is making it increasingly necessary that we introduce > some way of enforcing a minimum standard of decency on our lists. [...] You pillory[1] a man over his -private beliefs about death[2] to the point

Re: Minimum standard of decency, was: Amendment: GFDL is compatible with DFSG

MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Nevertheless, Craig Sanders's colourful rants break the lists code > of conduct far more clearly than posting satire to -devel-announce. > Where are the winged angels of vengence? But then, the d-d-a ban > didn't look like it was about enforcing the list codes

Re: Minimum standard of decency, was: Amendment: GFDL is compatible with DFSG

* MJ Ray [Tue, 31 Jan 2006 00:25:48 +]: > to the point where he recoils from the project[3], don't answer Are you deliberately lying here, to make your point prettier, or are you ciberately stating that Andrew lied himself in [3]? > 3. http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2006/01/msg00

Re: Minimum standard of decency, was: Amendment: GFDL is compatible with DFSG

MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Roger Leigh >> I think that this behaviour, as well as that on other lists in the >> recent past, is making it increasingly necessary that we introduce >> some way of enforcing a minimum standard of decency on our lists. [...] > > You pillory[1] a man over his

Re: Minimum standard of decency, was: Amendment: GFDL is compatible with DFSG

Adeodato Simó > Are you deliberately lying here, to make your point prettier, or are > you ciberately stating that Andrew lied himself in [3]? Neither. Thanks, -- MJR/slef My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/ Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct --