Re: none
Hi,
>>"Richard" == Richard Roberto <robertr@nwmarkets.co.jp> writes:
Richard> On 26 Nov 1998 11:28:50 -0600, srivasta@datasync.com writes:
>> I'll bite, Mr Bones. Please show me where we have decided
>> to exclude people or packages based on their skin color, race,
>> creed, or whether we happened to dislike them today.
>>
>> Either come up with the scads of archived messages
>> demonstrating that packages were excluded (or people) based on the
>> criteria quoted, or apologize for spreading this level of slander
>> about the Debian project.
Richard> Firstly, slander is a legal term and if you truly think you
Richard> could win a slander case against me for this, litigate!
Wonderful. When challenged to back up your statement, you have
no evidence, (despite saying that you did), and the only answer you
have is sue me I see. Guess what this does to your credibility? .
Richard> I dare you.
How very juvenile.
Richard> In a strange way, I'd sort of like to see Debian proven in a
Richard> court to have done the things plainly evidenced by the
Richard> archives and be held accountable for it. However, all I was
Richard> intending to point out is that the onslaught of bully
Richard> tacticts you use (yes Manoj I mean you specifically, but not
Richard> limited to you) are as effective a deterrant as any
Richard> descriminatory policy, in practice.
Interesting. You are the one who indulges in name calling, and
I get to be the bully. Let us see. A bully.
======================================================================
>From Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913) [webster]:
Bully \Bul"ly\, v. t. [imp. & p. p. {Bullied}; p. pr. & vb. n.
{Bullying}.]
To intimidate with threats and by an overbearing, swaggering
demeanor; to act the part of a bully toward.
======================================================================
Threats. Overbearing demeanor. What threats, pray? What can I
threaten anyone with in the first place? I may not suffer fools
gladly, but that is a far cry from being a bully.
======================================================================
>From WordNet (r) 1.6 [wn]:
n : a cruel and brutal fellow [syn: {tough}, {hooligan}, {ruffian},
{roughneck}, {rowdy}, {yob}, {yobo}, {yobbo}]
======================================================================
======================================================================
>From Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913) [webster]:
Bully \Bul"ly\, n.; pl. {Bullies}. [Cf. LG. bullerjaan,
bullerb["a]k, bullerbrook, a blusterer, D. bulderaar a
bluster, bulderen to bluster; prob. of imitative origin; or
cf. MHG. buole lover, G. buhle.]
1. A noisy, blustering fellow, more insolent than courageous;
one who is threatening and quarrelsome; an insolent,
tyrannical fellow.
======================================================================
So you can't back up your statements, and you go about
calling people names, and you expect a rational discourse to
emerge after all this?
Richard> Surely it would be rediculous to include specific language
Richard> that allowed you to be whimsically descriminatory,
I guess I agree.
Richard> but better still would to be less cut throught and bullying,
I am being bullying in the DFSG? What the hell are you talking
about now? You mean that spaeking plainly in the mailing list is some
how related to being whimsical in the DFSG? How are these related?
How can one justify the other?
Richard> and more open minded and permissive (socially) within the
Richard> project. That doesn't mean I think technical standards
Richard> should be lowered or relaxed, but just the excessive level
Richard> of "bashing" the debian project has become effective at and
Richard> infamous for. The merciless attacks on Bruce Perens are a
Richard> case in point.
I see. Bruce can tell is to E SH*T and D** and to go f***
ourselves, but that is OK Any crticism of his godhood is merciless
attack. merciless attack? To even publically acknowledge a lack of
trust of his judgement is a merciless attack? God, that speaks
volumes.
Richard> I realise that my view is subjective and you may feel differently
Richard> about the way the project conducts itself, but I'm certainly
Richard> entitled to my view and I'm grateful for the opportunity to express
Richard> it, despite your attacks above.
What attacks? I asked you to back up your statements, which
you failed to do You then proceeded to call me names. The best I can
say about your post is that it was confused, and mixed up in some
incomprehensible fashion, elements of the DFSG and one mode of speech
on the mailing list.
manoj
whose temper is rartely improved by people calling him names
--
If God had intended Man to Smoke, He would have set him on Fire.
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@acm.org> <http://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/>
Key C7261095 fingerprint = CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
Reply to: