Re: First Call for votes: General resolution for the handling of the non-free section
On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 11:32:25PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> writes:
>
> > You've got a bad habit of missing the point made in an email, then
> > trimming it so that no one else can see the point either.
>
> If so, it's not intentional, and please correct it.
>
> > My complaint was that you're making things personal; changing your
> > phrasing in the way you suggest does nothing to alleviate that. If
> > you're interested in having a useful debate, argue on the _topic_,
> > not about the person advancing an opposing argument.
>
> My complaint was specifically that you (and Sven, partially) had given
> up on what I see as the crucial compromise behind section five of the
> SC. Some people might oppose the GR pending for different reasons;
> this is not an argument for the GR. Rather, it was an explanation of
> a mistake that I believe you made, and that if someone with the
> awareness and visibility as yourself makes that mistake so frequently
> and so persistently, then it seems to me that the compromise
> underlying section five of the SC has broken down.
Well, i think aj is well placed to know what is part of the debian
archive or not. The fact that the debian archive carries the debian
distribution, and some other stuff, well, that you definitively want to
ignore.
Also, i will not speak again about this, since it is evident that you
asked us, me and aj nominally, to use clearer language on this, and
refuse to do the same, playing on the confusion.
And now that you are aware of that, please refrain from using
voluntarily confusing terms in the future.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: