On Mon, Mar 08, 2004 at 12:16:47PM +0000, iain d broadfoot wrote: > * Andrew Suffield (asuffield@debian.org) wrote: > > On Sun, Mar 07, 2004 at 11:40:21PM +0000, MJ Ray wrote: > > > Further generalisation: > > > > > > Don't do anything to us, just because of what we are. > > > > > > That has the benefit of being non-sexist and fitting most (all?) > > > discrimination. > > > > It's entirely unworkable, however. At some point you have to draw the > > line - Debian is founded upon discrimination against non-free things > > and against broken code, and by extension, their creators and > > users. The NM process is founded upon discrimination against the > > stupid and the useless. The US is founded upon discrimination against > > the poor. Etcetera. > > There is a major difference between discrimination based on > sex/gender/sexuality/religion/race/etc/etc/etc and discrimination on > quality of code/non-free licenses/etc/etc/etc - the first set tend to be > inherent to the person being discriminated against, while the second set > can be changed. Out of the ones you listed, I can think of numerous cases where I've seen people disagree with your classification of sexuality, religion, code, and licensing. Which is kinda the point; these things are fiendishly difficult to pin down. -- .''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield : :' : http://www.debian.org/ | `. `' | `- -><- |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature