Ruben Safir, le lun. 28 oct. 2019 18:52:11 -0400, a ecrit:
> On 10/28/19 6:22 PM, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> >> There is no class of people targeted by that joke. Are virgins a class
> >> now?
> > Yes.
>
> That is all that needs to be said at this point. You are not being
> rational or reasonable
Ruben Safir, le lun. 28 oct. 2019 18:05:43 -0400, a ecrit:
> On 10/28/19 5:03 PM, Jean Louis wrote:
> > class of people which is targeted by the
> > joke, that person may feel offended, sure.
>
> There is no class of people targeted by that joke. Are virgins a class now?
Yes.
Samuel
Ruben Safir, le lun. 28 oct. 2019 16:06:04 -0400, a ecrit:
> On 10/28/19 2:41 PM, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > Jean Louis, le lun. 28 oct. 2019 21:54:00 +0530, a ecrit:
> >> Virgin joke is a joke
> > Now that I have read about it, I can definitely say that it is a
> > completely inappropriate "joke".
Ruben Safir, le lun. 28 oct. 2019 18:53:25 -0400, a ecrit:
> On 10/28/19 6:31 PM, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > It is not a question of reference to human sexuality only. It is a
> > question of saying that a particular (non-)sexuality status is something
> > that shall be fixed, as if it was shameful
Jean Louis, le mar. 29 oct. 2019 00:27:51 +0530, a ecrit:
> * Samuel Thibault [2019-10-29 00:12]:
> > Jean Louis, le lun. 28 oct. 2019 21:54:00 +0530, a ecrit:
> > > Virgin joke is a joke
> >
> > Now that I have read about it, I can definitely say that it is a
> > completely inappropriate joke.
>
https://www.hair-loss-is-awesome.com/100-baldness-jokes/
On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 12:27:51AM +0530, Jean Louis wrote:
> * Samuel Thibault [2019-10-29 00:12]:
> > Jean Louis, le lun. 28 oct. 2019 21:54:00 +0530, a ecrit:
> > > Virgin joke is a joke
> >
> > Now that I have read about it, I can def
On 10/28/19 7:06 PM, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> It seems you are completely missing all the societal things
Not at all. You're still just throwing stuff about hoping something
sticks. There is nothing in Stallmans video that can be construed at
harmful to ANYONE. Groucho Marx, maybe. RMS, never
On 10/28/19 7:34 PM, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> One of the ways the "joke" was presented is
>
> "we believe that taking her emacs virginity away is a blessed act"
completely not offense. No aspect of it is offensive, unless you hate
the speaker and have an ax to grind.
--
So many immigrant g
On 10/28/19 6:22 PM, Samuel Thibault wrote:
>> There is no class of people targeted by that joke. Are virgins a class now?
> Yes.
>
> Samuel
That is all that needs to be said at this point. You are not being
rational or reasonable.
--
So many immigrant groups have swept through our town
that
On 10/28/19 5:03 PM, Jean Louis wrote:
> class of people which is targeted by the
> joke, that person may feel offended, sure.
There is no class of people targeted by that joke. Are virgins a class now?
--
So many immigrant groups have swept through our town
that Brooklyn, like Atlantis, re
On 10/25/19 9:56 AM, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Looking at the form of Debian’s Social Contract, its conciseness and
> clarity, I was inspired to think about a few points that would summarize
> GNU’s mission and workings in a way that would hopefully be rather
> consensual among maintainers (I’
There was no intention and so I do not know why I am censored for "tit
for tat", moderator did not say. But I don't care to be censored. It
probably "offended" somebody. I guess it was a joke... hahhah
* Ruben Safir [2019-10-29 01:58]:
> On 10/28/19 2:41 PM, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > Jean Louis,
On 2019-10-28 13:06, Ruben Safir wrote:
On 10/28/19 2:41 PM, Samuel Thibault wrote:
Jean Louis, le lun. 28 oct. 2019 21:54:00 +0530, a ecrit:
Virgin joke is a joke
Now that I have read about it, I can definitely say that it is a
completely inappropriate "joke". Sure, it'll get a lot of people
On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 4:30 PM Florian Weimer wrote:
>
> * Carlos O'Donell:
>
> > The GNU C Library main development list was pre-moderated for almost 5
> > years. During that period we moved a lot of conversations to the glibc
> > help mailing list using moderation. This helped new users get sta
On 10/28/19 3:11 PM, DJ Delorie wrote:
> a...@gnu.org (Alfred M. Szmidt) writes:
>> They shouldn't be required to defend the GNU projects values, we
>> welcome everyone. And that is on purpose.
>
> I see a problem here... GNU is inclusive to anyone who is willing to be
> a dumb code monkey who do
* Carlos O'Donell:
> I placed the list on moderation to help with cooling down heated
> discussions. It is entirely within the normal bounds of list
> management to use moderation.
It's actually very unusual to see this on technical/FOSS lists. Some
communities have secret and not-so-secret bans
* Samuel Thibault [2019-10-29 00:12]:
> Jean Louis, le lun. 28 oct. 2019 21:54:00 +0530, a ecrit:
> > Virgin joke is a joke
>
> Now that I have read about it, I can definitely say that it is a
> completely inappropriate joke.
But I gave you the link, Russians are laughing, so look 26th August
20
On 10/28/19 2:41 PM, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Jean Louis, le lun. 28 oct. 2019 21:54:00 +0530, a ecrit:
>> Virgin joke is a joke
> Now that I have read about it, I can definitely say that it is a
> completely inappropriate "joke". Sure, it'll get a lot of people laugh.
> But it'll also get some peo
* Carlos O'Donell:
> The GNU C Library main development list was pre-moderated for almost 5
> years. During that period we moved a lot of conversations to the glibc
> help mailing list using moderation. This helped new users get started
> in a more welcoming environment. Just an example of a publi
* Samuel Thibault:
> I don't think it does, I have never seen any reference to that in
> anything talking about the Debian Social Contract, and not in the 1997
> discussions leading to it either. Actually it took me a bit of time to
> even just realize what reference you were talking about (even i
Hello all,
thanks to Ludovic for posting a first concrete suggestion! I agree with
Mark's comments on removing the links, although I also think it was good to
have them in the first version put up for comments - it helps with the
bootstrapping process, showing that what is proposed is in line with
On 10/28/19 2:41 PM, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Jean Louis, le lun. 28 oct. 2019 21:54:00 +0530, a ecrit:
>> Virgin joke is a joke
> Now that I have read about it, I can definitely say that it is a
> completely inappropriate "joke". Sure, it'll get a lot of people laugh.
> But it'll also get some peo
On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 4:10 PM Florian Weimer wrote:
>
> * Carlos O'Donell:
>
> > I placed the list on moderation to help with cooling down heated
> > discussions. It is entirely within the normal bounds of list
> > management to use moderation.
>
> It's actually very unusual to see this on techn
* Jean Louis:
> * Samuel Thibault [2019-10-27 16:33]:
>> Alfred M. Szmidt, le dim. 27 oct. 2019 13:56:00 -0400, a ecrit:
>> > we have participants that clearly do not agree with the GNU projects
>> > stance on an issue.
>> >
>> > This shows the error quite clearly in why having the community
>>
Hello Mark,
thanks for pointing out this large collection of pages to read! Indeed
there is very little in terms of structure, but still a few gems that
we should reference.
I would like to additonally read some external document, the Debian Social
Contract. Debian is clearly very successful as a
a...@gnu.org (Alfred M. Szmidt) writes:
> They shouldn't be required to defend the GNU projects values, we
> welcome everyone. And that is on purpose.
I see a problem here... GNU is inclusive to anyone who is willing to be
a dumb code monkey who doesn't care about freedom, but is unwilling to
be
Jean Louis, le lun. 28 oct. 2019 21:54:00 +0530, a ecrit:
> Virgin joke is a joke
Now that I have read about it, I can definitely say that it is a
completely inappropriate "joke". Sure, it'll get a lot of people laugh.
But it'll also get some people not at ease / ashamed, etc., which is
just in li
Hey Samuel,
Keep sending, you are welcome.
* Samuel Thibault [2019-10-28 23:34]:
> Jean Louis, le lun. 28 oct. 2019 21:54:00 +0530, a ecrit:
> > Now you say it did not start, nobody started talking about social
> > contract on this list. Huahahahhahahaha. How contradictory is that!
>
> You are
Debian's social contract does define it in a different way than
yours, yes. And that is what the commmunity enforced, and it did
not fail to do so: the main Debian archive only contains free
software and some references to non-free software. That is what was
promised, and that is wha
Jean Louis, le lun. 28 oct. 2019 21:54:00 +0530, a ecrit:
> Now you say it did not start, nobody started talking about "social
> contract" on this list. Huahahahhahahaha. How contradictory is that!
You are the one looking for contradictions.
I didn't say there wasn't discussion about a "social co
Excuse me, do GNU actually have precedents when the âstubborn
governanceâ was proved to be needed to keep things free?
Readline, Objective-C backend, not allowing propietery hackery with
GCC, GPLv3 and Tivioization, Emacs and plugins, come to mind.
Fighting non-free software is always a
> What GNU maintainers agree to is very small, it is only to follow the
> policies that we have. They don't need to go beyond that, which is
> what "uphold" would imply.
Exactly, thatâs the change weâre proposing: members of the project
(maintainers and contributors alike who w
* Samuel Thibault [2019-10-28 20:24]:
> Jean Louis, le lun. 28 oct. 2019 18:06:35 +0530, a ecrit:
> > Social Contract is now being discussed as something as adopted. I
> > do not see it is adopted.
>
> Nobody said it was adopted. Nobody even said such a thing would have
> to be called social cont
On 10/28/19 8:36 AM, Jean Louis wrote:
> "Social contract arguments typically posit that individuals have
> consented, either explicitly or tacitly, to surrender some of their
> freedoms and submit to the authority (of the ruler, or to the decision
> of a majority) in exchange for protection of the
Jean Louis, le lun. 28 oct. 2019 18:06:35 +0530, a ecrit:
> "Social Contract" is now being discussed as something as "adopted". I
> do not see it is "adopted".
Nobody said it was "adopted". Nobody even said such a thing would have
to be called "social contract". Nobody said it had to be written by
On Sun, Oct 27, 2019 at 6:19 PM Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>
> Hi Alfred,
>
> a...@gnu.org (Alfred M. Szmidt) skribis:
>
> > What GNU maintainers agree to is very small, it is only to follow the
> > policies that we have. They don't need to go beyond that, which is
> > what "uphold" would imply.
>
>
On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 10:21 AM Dmitry Alexandrov <321...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Mark Wielaard wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 05:22:48AM +0300, Dmitry Alexandrov wrote:
> >> Iʼd like to report that my message number d0eidcqu.321...@gmail.com
> >> (below), sent a day ago to gnu-misc-discuss@gn
* Dmitry Alexandrov <321...@gmail.com> [2019-10-28 17:53]:
> In particular, the SKS keyserver network — the de-facto standard for
> years — is not, it is a decentralized replicated network — like
> Usenet; while keys.openpgp.org, to carry on the analogy, is like
> Facebook.
Yes, I would say it sho
Jean Louis wrote:
> * Dmitry Alexandrov <321...@gmail.com> [2019-10-28 15:21]:
>> Even if FSF, like Werner Koch , believes that there is
>> nothing wrong ethically with steering users to an isolated proprietary
>> service, the guide is simply incorrect factually.
>
> Do you refer to online servi
Jason Self wrote:
> Dmitry Alexandrov <321...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Mark Wielaard wrote:
>>> On Sat, 2019-10-26 at 02:45 +0300, Dmitry Alexandrov wrote:
Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> * GNU welcomes contributions from all and everyone
>
> The GNU Project produces software for anyone to
* Samuel Thibault [2019-10-24 16:11]:
> Agreed!
>
> And that is where the social contract can help. While the Debian one
> does explicitly say that it wants to let Debian work also with non-free
> software, the GNU one can explicitly say that GNU contains only 100%
> purely free software, and doe
* Ruben Safir [2019-10-22 12:42]:
> Appointment has always worked. It is a volunteer organization, so your
> choices are usually thin. If a project is of interest, them RMS can
> appoint someone, as he does now. And when he wants to step down he can
> appoint someone to take over his roles, alt
Mark Wielaard wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 05:22:48AM +0300, Dmitry Alexandrov wrote:
>> Iʼd like to report that my message number d0eidcqu.321...@gmail.com (below),
>> sent a day ago to gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org (which I am subscribed on and
>> usually have no problems to post to), had not l
* Samuel Thibault [2019-10-27 16:33]:
> Then we can write that in a GNU social contract, instead of having to
> rely on stubborn governance.
Stubborn governance or however you name it is still successful
governance.
--
Thanks,
Jean Louis
P.S. I would like that you give facts and not generaliza
* Samuel Thibault [2019-10-27 16:33]:
> Alfred M. Szmidt, le dim. 27 oct. 2019 13:56:00 -0400, a ecrit:
> > we have participants that clearly do not agree with the GNU projects
> > stance on an issue.
> >
> > This shows the error quite clearly in why having the community
> > deciding philosophica
* Ruben Safir [2019-10-22 10:18]:
> On 10/22/19 4:31 AM, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> > That is a different organization model.
>
>
> Yeah, I'm not interested in anything that reduces RMS's influence and
> control of GNU at this point. I think he has been abused and I just
> don't carer anymore. If
* František Kučera [2019-10-22 04:44]:
> So if this is to have a chance of success, there must be a rigid
> (immutable) constitution which guarantees the principles in the long
> term. (Sure, immutability has its pitfalls, but if the principles are to
> change, it is necessary to come up with a ne
* Florian Weimer [2019-10-24 16:32]:
> * Alfred M. Szmidt:
>
> > Debian renegaded on their goal of being a 100% free software system,
> > they now include non-free software. That is the danger, and it is
> > very much real.
>
> And GNU comes with non-free documentation. We are not going to rea
* Mark Wielaard [2019-10-21 20:27]:
> I would like to see GNU organized in such a way that GNU volunteers,
> who devote so much time and energy to GNU, will be able to grow and
> become the next generation of GNU leaders through some kind of
> apprenticeship. People should always be on the outlook
* Samuel Thibault [2019-10-24 16:55]:
> What is important here is this:
>
> > And that is the exact type word wiggling that we shouldn't accept
> > here, and the exact reason why this project is run the way it is run.
>
> And that is where a social contract would allow to enforce it, without
> t
* Mark Wielaard [2019-10-26 14:09]:
> Hi Ludo,
>
> On Fri, 2019-10-25 at 15:56 +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> > Looking at the form of Debian’s Social Contract, its conciseness and
> > clarity, I was inspired to think about a few points that would summarize
> > GNU’s mission and workings in a wa
* Carlos O'Donell [2019-10-22 10:38]:
> On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 10:21 AM Ruben Safir wrote:
> >
> > On 10/22/19 4:31 AM, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> > > That is a different organization model.
> >
> >
> > Yeah, I'm not interested in anything that reduces RMS's influence and
> > control of GNU at this
* Dmitry Alexandrov <321...@gmail.com> [2019-10-28 15:21]:
> Even if FSF, like Werner Koch , believes that there is
> nothing wrong ethically with steering users to an isolated
> proprietary service, the guide is simply incorrect factually.
Do you refer to online service?
Are not all websites pro
a...@gnu.org (Alfred M. Szmidt) wrote:
>> The only way tackle non-free software is to explicitly reject it, at all
> times.
>
>Then we can write that in a GNU social contract, instead of having to rely
> on stubborn governance.
>
> Yet again, you argue that we should have a weaker governa
Some GNU packages do require copyright assignment to the FSF but
anyone is able to do so. Note that the blog post is from 9 years ago.
The FSF has made improvements to the process since then [0] and it's
now entirely paperless [1]. Some amount of formality will always be
needed to keep the copyrigh
55 matches
Mail list logo
