[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Nomination

Branden Robinson <branden@ecn.purdue.edu> writes:

   Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
   Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

   On Thu, Dec 10, 1998 at 05:58:34PM +0100, Ole J. Tetlie wrote:
   > I'd love to see more shakespearian language on -devel. It's
   > so colourful.

   What, weren't you around when Ionnais Tambouris (sp!?) was active on these

Sample of his style below.  Perhaps you'd like to see more of this?

To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Commercial interests & project leader
From: ioannis@flinet.com
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 17:45:15 -0400
In-Reply-To: <m0xIIrs-00IdTXC@golem.pixar.com>; from Bruce Perens on Mon, Oct 06, 1997 at 12:31:00PM -0800
References: <m0xIIrs-00IdTXC@golem.pixar.com>

>> Is it a conflict of interest?
>  I think conflict-of-interest is a real concern,

 "He was excellent above all men in theft and perjury."
                                                 [Homer, 900 B.C.]

      Oh Warwick, there was a time when our leaders were famous
among the other debians only for their unix and os skills;
but now, if I am not mistaken, they are equally famous for their
morality skills, especially in this list. How different is our fate!
Here at Debian there is scarcity of the commodity, and all of morality
seems to have emigrated from us to Dave. I am certain that if you were
to ask us whether leadership can pose a conflict of interest, I
would laugh in your face, and say: "Warwich, you have far too good an
opinion of us, if you think that we answer your question. For we
literally do not know what morality is, much less whether it
can pose a conflict, and whether it can be avoided or not."

   And I myself, Warwick, living in the same region of poverty, I
am as poor as the rest of them; and confess with shame that I know
very little about this conflict. All I am able to do is refer to the moral
sciences for an answer: let me then affirm that "conflict of interest" is
a contemporary pseudo-philosophical phrase without any coherent meaning,
both metaphysically and rationally, and after many years of study, I have
never heard of any philosopher stating otherwise. To the contrary, there
is ample of evidence in Simonides, Bias, Pittacus, Plato, Aristotle,
Hume, Nietze, Wittgenstein, Rand, and Rorty who are of the mind that this
phrase is non-compute and uncomprehensible.

   So, no concept of conflict can exist at all; should you insist, you
stand to be refuted by our inheritance. Nothing can be clearer. And when
Dale desires to run, he will step to the podium and announce his candidacy
and will answer the same questions put to others. Almost all developers
are ready to come forward and testify of his good repute and be public
witnesses. They know him for years. My good Sirs, were is the conflict?
Make it comprehensible, in simple language so that I can follow. On one
hand, the developers are of the highest opinion, approve of him, and are
not concerned; and on the other, the vast majority of users are solely
after free software and are concerned with the private lives of anyone else,
much or little. I would be very sorry if Dale is intimidated by these
base notions of pop philosophy.

Reply to: