Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activity monitor
On Wed, 1 Dec 2004 23:10:59 +0000, Will Newton <will@misconception.org.uk> said:
> On Wednesday 01 Dec 2004 17:12, Michelle Konzack wrote:
>> > We need to discuss this point and find a technical way of solving
>> > the first.
>>
>> erotic.debian.org
> It seems to me this is the sensible solution. When we could not
> export crypto from the US for legal reasons we created non-US. Now I
> think it is as significant an issue to distribute items such as
> hot-babe.
Cool, we legitimize Debian Pr0n.
> It may be a "free speech" issue and people may not want to
> compromise, but this is the way that a significant part of the world
> is, and we have to be pragmatic. Do we need hot-babe in main? I
> don't think so. Is it a significant problem to have it there? Yes it
> is in many countries.
It is illegal in many countries to have images of living
things -- or pictures of women with their head uncovered. Pragmatism,
in this case, is the enemy of freedom.
BTW, the DFSG is not very pragmatic, nor is the social
contract. We have drawn a line there, that's what defines us.
> We are not talking about something subjectively offensive but a real
> legal problem.
As am I -- lots of legal problems in lots of domains.
manoj
--
Whatever you do will be insignificant, but it is very important that
you do it. Gandhi
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Reply to: