Re: Discussion - non-free software removal
On Wed, Nov 13, 2002 at 02:55:50PM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 07:43:12PM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
> > More important is the very first statement in our Social Contract:
> > "Debian Will Remain 100% Free Software". I want you and everyone else
> > to understand that there are only two possible correct stances
> > regarding clause 1 of the Social Contract:
>
> yawn. high-school level sophistry. how tedious.
To which you have no actual rebuttal, save for that it's "tedious". I also
remind you that you have yet to demonstrate even one material harm to our
users by removing non-free from future Debian archives.
You conveniently seem to leave that bit out of every message you quote.
> here's news for you: we're not as stupid as you think we are.
>
> a lie by omission is still a lie.
See above.
>
> > > want to install and run non-free software is not sufficient reason
> > > to diminish utility for debian users.
> >
> > I did not state that I find that offensive.
>
> you don't have to. your zealous bigotry makes it obvious.
OK, then let me state for the record that I do NOT find it offensive, that I
myself use non-free software at work, and that I do not wish useful non-free
software, nor its users, to simply drop off the face of the earth.
Furthermore, I note that I myself maintain non-free packages for Debian that
would be effected by my proposed Resolution. Also, that the non-free
software I use at work would be effected by my proposed Resolution.
One wonders where you derive this odd notion that I hate non-free software
and its users, when in fact I use and maintain that software for Debian.
> > I did not state that I want to diminish utility for Debian users.
>
> cause and effect doesn't require advance notice.
>
> your actions have effects whether you state them or not.
Perhaps you could indulge us by stating what these effects you contrinue to
ambiguously refer to are?
Reply to: