Re: gimp1.2: gimp package suggest non-free software
On Thu, 13 Nov 2003, Mathieu Roy wrote:
> Adam Heath <doogie@debian.org> a tapoté :
>
> > On Wed, 12 Nov 2003, Mathieu Roy wrote:
> >
> >> 2) Do you have any valid proof of what you claim? Please, avoid being
> >> a liar, this is a very bad attitude. Keep your personal feeling
> >> out of this mailing-list, I do not give a toss about it and I think
> >> that noone else does.
> >
> > A liar? You have a very slant view on life.
> >
> > It's much better to say "you are mistaken" or "you are misinformed" then to
> > call someone a liar. Because you have said it this way, it looks badly on
> > you, no matter what the other person has done.
>
> So someone can tell whatever he wants without taking care of the
> truth?
No, of course not. How the hell can you infer that by reading what I said?
When you are debating a point, whether truths or lies are being said, it
always looks better on you, if you follow the above.
You're response, in this manner, shows me that you always look for the bad in
everything, never the good. These are the kinds of people that society needs
to lock away, as they are the miscreants(the murders, robbers, politicians).
> The matter to me is not how people looks like but what people
> says. And in this case, there were two options: a misinformation or a
> lie. With a so affirmative phrase, it is some kind of lie in any case:
> when you are not well informed, if you pretend to be, you commit some
> kind of lie, and your attitude is misleading for everybody.
You calling someone mistaken, or someone a liar, doesn't change what that
person said from wrong to right. But you have a better chance of convincing
others, when you say it the former way.
If you call someone a liar, others are likely to ignore you, even if what the
other person said was wrong.
Reply to: