Re: not a first amendment question
On Tue, Dec 02, 1997 at 03:00:22PM +0200, Petri Wessman wrote:
> On Mon, 01 Dec 1997 16:40:00 -0500, Brian White <bcwhite@verisim.com> said:
>
> I think the recent comparison to "fortune" was valid. It asks whether
> or not to install the "offensive" portion at install time. Why
> couldn't the purity package (and any other similiar packages) do the
> same? Or at least display a warning about "possibly offensive
> content". That way everyone should be reasonably happy.
I'd like to point out that the version of purity under question did have such a warning.
>From the control file from purity_1-2.deb...
NOTE: This package contains some material which may be inappropriate for minors, and/or may offend some people.
A similar warning was also contained in the README.debian file
as well as a strong recommendation that people considering installing purity on a multi-user system
to which children might have access check that they were not in violation of local laws.
This to me constitutes a fair and reasonable warning that the package contains offensive material.
If, at this stage, you still downloaded purity and installed it,
I would suggest that an appropriate response to "oh my god this is naughty" is, "well, you _were_ warned."
Now, not being on debian-private (yet) I'm not able to guage the opinions of the other developers on this one
it appears a fair bt of discussion took place there too.
But the feeling that I got from Bruce was either drop the offensive stuff or have the package dropped.
I don't agree with this, I don't think its fair,
in fact, I believe the idea of supporting net censorship will result (eventually) in the net being
Reduced to the point where _everything_ must be vetted and deemed suitable (by some so called higher authority) to be suitable for the public at large.
On the other hand, Bruce *is* the project leader, so. *shrug*. I guess he gets the final say. *grin*.
Anyway, the latest purity package contains pointers to the rest of the tests,
and I think, at least for now, thats about the best we're going to get.
To the developers who are upset by this,
I hope someone who has been wth the project just a tad longer than me takes it upon themselves to put it to a policy vote.
I'd like to see a clear policy on just what is and isn't acceptable for debian rather than
"I think we can safely draw the line at..."
I think, personally, I'll be sticking in the future to packaging things a little less contraversial.
Just my 2k worth.
Aaron
>
> //Petri
>
>
> --
> TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
> debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org .
> Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
>
--
Aaron Howell. Q.U.T Equity Department, Technical Support/Training.
work: a.howell@qut.edu.au Linux/Networking Support.
home: a.howell@student.qut.edu.au phone +61-412-956-467
www: http://users.bayside.net.au/~aaron irc: DaRkAnGeL
Support the efforts of the Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial Email.
http://www.cauce.org for details. help stamp out internet junkmail.
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org .
Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
Reply to: