[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Second call for votes for the debian project leader election 2007

On Fri, 30 Mar 2007, Manoj Srivastava wrote:

On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 07:10:53 +0200 (CEST), Andreas Tille <tillea@rki.de> said:

On Thu, 29 Mar 2007, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
...  In order to type the letter "a", look on the keyboard (ask
someone ...

Manoj, the answer you gave here does not fit the statistics you

       I have no idea what this means.  What does my answer have to
do with the statistics posted?

I started the thread on this list with this mail.


       Sure, we have a problem.

OK, so please take this honest.

Far too many people are using MUAs
that seem incapable  of following standards. I fail to see what I can
do to fix it, apart from telling people: USE STANDARDS COMPLIANT

But you didn't say *how*.  Even the hint to mailx you gave me in private
mail did not work in every case.  I have no idea whether mailx is standards
compliant or not, but my attempts to use it failed while others were

       There. Satisfied?


       If you want to be pedantic about it, ballots need to be either:
a) Mail messages compliant with RFC 2015 (issued in 1996), and
   updated by RFC 3156, or, if not using MIME,
b) An unmangled RFC 2440 complaint OpenPGP message as the body

Well beeing pedantig means missing real live.  What currently happens
is another form of ignoring real live.  If it is a known fact that people
are happy using MUAs that do not fit a) and b) for every day work and
do not face problems except when sending a ballot to vote I would
regard it as practical inacceptable even if theoretical correct.  (This
would be not the first case where theoretical correct thinks do not
work perfectly in real live.)

       Well, sorry, but I do find that it, umm,  tickles my funny
bone to see in LWN, no less,  a tongue in cheek article about the
difficulty people are having just sending singed email.  I promisre
to try to be more sober in the future.

I assume it is just me that I'm unable to explain you the point of my
previous mails.  You are obviousely missing it continuosely.  So this
is my last attempt.

Kind regards



Reply to: