Re: Clarifications
>>>>> On Sun, 11 Jun 2000 01:52:48 -0400, Adam McKenna <adam-debian@flounder.net> said:
Adam> On Sun, Jun 11, 2000 at 01:49:39AM -0400, James LewisMoss
Adam> wrote:
>> >>>>> On Sat, 10 Jun 2000 15:21:27 -0500, David Starner
>> >>>>> <dvdeug@x8b4e53cd.dhcp.okstate.edu> said:
>>
David> You seem to deny that this is a major change, which apparenly
David> means you haven't been reading anything the other people
David> say. I find your position reprehesible - instead of leading by
David> example and removing your non-free packages from distribution
David> and trying to convince others to do the same, you would try
David> changing the rules to get your way. You then deny that your
David> change would have consequences and use double-talk - "it is no
David> more than miscellany", 'non-free packages could still use the
David> BTS' (paraphrase) - to convince people.
>>
>> This is uncalled for. Attacking someone and calling them
>> dishonest is not a good way to make anyone else actually listen to
>> your arguments. I certainly won't read any more of your posts.
Adam> Very nice. When someone disagrees with you in real life, do
Adam> you just put your fingers in your ears and yell
Adam> "lalalalalalala"?
Give me a break. This wasn't disagreement. This was attacking the
character of someone else. If I have a discussion with someone in
real life and they call me stupid I tend to no longer have discussions
with them. Why don't you read what I said?
Ah. And thank you for calling me childish. Another person I can add
to my "cannot have a reasonable discussion without insulting others" list.
Jim
--
@James LewisMoss <dres@debian.org | Blessed Be!
@ http://jimdres.home.mindspring.com | Linux is kewl!
@"Argue for your limitations and sure enough, they're yours." Bach
Reply to: