Re: plagiarism of reiserfs by Debian
On Thu, 24 Apr 2003 11:46:32 +1000, Martin Pool <mbp@sourcefrog.net> said:
> On Tue, 22 Apr 2003 17:53:14 -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> On Tue, 22 Apr 2003 16:59:59 +1000, Martin Pool
>> <mbp@sourcefrog.net> said:
>>
>>> For example, at least two people called Hans a troll. An upstream
>>> author expressing concern about the way their code is packaged is
>>> not trolling (i.e. making random arguments just to provoke
>>> flames.)
>>
>> I find it interesting that you consider a public accusation of
>> plagiarism to be merely "expressing concern".
> I was intentionally using moderate language because (a) I don't
> believe it is strictly plagiarism (as you say),
You need a modifier strictly there? You think it was loosely
plagiarism?
> and (b) because I don't think inflaming the debate by tossing around
> words like "plagiarism" (or "troll", "slander", etc) is very
> helpful.
I think anyone throwing out unsubstantiatged accusation of
plagiarism is indeed a troll; and never intended to jave a rational
conversation. If you start out by being rude, what ought you to
expect?
> (Had I thought about it more, I would have realized the second one
> goes completely against the behaviour expected on -devel, which is
> apparently to be as personal and negative as possible.)
Quite so. Now you know.
>> However, I also find your judgment in this horribly tainted, which
>> leads me to place less credence in the rest of your argument,
>> sorry.
> Well, Hans and Ed seem to have arrived at exactly the outcome I was
> arguing for, so I suppose I can't have been completely wrong:
> despite that Debian has the legal right to change the code, it
> should seek compromise between the author and the distribution's
> goals.
The fact that the outcome reached meets your desires in no way
mitigates the bias you were displaying.
> You need to get past the emotional upset you felt (understandably)
> at Debian being accused of plagiarism. (Well, it seems to have been
> resolved without your help, so I suppose you can stay upset if you
> prefer.)
Ah. Turn the other cheek, ad infinitum. Not quite my
style. I am to take it that
>> Or the blindingly obvious choice: Your blatant spin displays a bias
>> so huge that your arguments are no longer credible?
> It's a sorry day when wanting Debian to give some consideration to
> the opinions of original authors is "huge bias".
I see. Wanting Debian to fawn over authors (as if we are a
body totally devoid of authors of free software) even when the
aforementioned authors insult us and tar our reputation is merely
"some consideration".
If you do not think your view point is biased, then I am sorry
to say I am not wearing those blinkers.
manoj
--
It's always darkest just before the lights go out. -- Alex Clark
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Reply to: