Re: Bug#138541: ITP: debian-sanitize (was Re: inappropriate racist and other offensive material)
>>"Jeff" == Jeff Licquia <licquia@debian.org> writes:
Jeff> On Sat, 2002-03-16 at 15:39, Steve Langasek wrote:
>> I object to using any subjective method (such as popular vote) for
>> determining which packages should be conflicted with in such a package.
Jeff> OK; we can scratch the Conflicts: part unless someone else can give a
Jeff> good reason to have it. The package can act like vrms, and provide a
Jeff> report of some kind. Perhaps the package could also take configuration
Jeff> (adding or removing packages for personal preference), and could
Jeff> possibly produce a package via equivs or some such for those who want
Jeff> it.
That woulds be amusing, if we do manage to get an essential
package deemed inappropriate (the kernel has quite inappropriate and
offensive language in it)
>> In addition, if you use the simple criterion of having Debian developers
>> indicate whether they find a given package offensive, I think the only
>> two packages you'll get a majority of developers to say they find
>> offensive are vi and emacs.
Jeff> True. Unfortunately, when you're talking about something as subjective
Jeff> as offense, there aren't many good classification systems that won't
Jeff> themselves be offensive to someone. Democratic vote strikes me as one
Jeff> of the few that's hard to challenge.
Rubbish. The tyrrany of the majority is quite easy to
challenge, especially when it comes to determining mores and imposing
cultural biases on the minority. Try telling the Jewish folks that
majority rules is good, when it comes to cultural., religious, or
social mores, (which is what most offensive stuff offends against),
given the majority approved pogroms that swept through europe
periodically in the past.
Oh, another example of popular idiocy: a couple of states
dictated in a purely democratic fashion that the value of pi was no
longer an infinite irrational number, but a nice finite rational
number, by official decree.
A million people can be just as wrong as one.
Jeff> Also note my proposal to give the DPL "special rights", which could
Jeff> allow for certain abuses to be curtailed.
Oh, yes, the DPL has special right to decide on moral
turpitude of packages.
Jeff> This is an experiment that relies on some assumptions:
Jeff> - Most developers, joking aside, are capable of distinguishing
Jeff> between technical preference and moral repugnance.
Umm. I don't think it has a place in Debian. And moral
repugnance has cultural factors. I also feel that it is a personal
judgement call, not something to be decided by the majority. And it
requires active participation of people who do not believe in the
process, if only not to be marginalized by an voal group that goes
about passing moral judgements unchallenged (in other words, I may
have to vote for packages defensively even if I believe such voting
is repugnant and morally bankrupt).
Jeff> - Most developers would like to avoid flamewars like this in
Jeff> the future, and "punting" to a package like this is a good way
Jeff> to stop them.
I see. Well, I prefer not to let others make my moral
judgements for me, and no, I prefer not to punt to a package, nor do
I feel particularily inclined to let such judgements made by my
betters for me.
Punt indeed.
Jeff> - Most developers would prefer adding information to the
Jeff> system ("these packages might be offensive to some people") to
Jeff> removing information ("this code/output/data is offensive to
Jeff> some people, so I'll remove it in the diff").
As I have said before, since one is not the other person, one
can't say. And I find peer pressure to supress ideas that may be
offensive offensive by itself.
Jeff> - Most developers will realize that trivializing the package by voting
Jeff> on technical grounds ("emacs offends me") will render the package
Jeff> unusable for the purposes above.
Heh heh. I really find perl/python/kernel images(DEADBEEF?!!)/emacs/vi
quite unacceptable.
Jeff> If it turns out I'm not right, I'll orphan the package and call the
Jeff> experiment a failure.
People ought to be making subjective, individual decisions by
themselves. Enforcing some kind of moral majority standard is
something I find highly offensive
manoj
--
: I've tried (in vi) "g/[a-z]\n[a-z]/s//_/"...but that doesn't : cut
it. Any ideas? (I take it that it may be a two-pass sort of
solution). In the first pass, install perl. :-) Larry Wall
<6849@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV>
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Reply to: