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

Re: Debian, lists and discrimination

[MJ Ray]
> Are posts which should otherwise go to other lists accepted on -women
> purely because they involve women? It looks that way from yesterday's
> list description and past activity.

Is that your real concern?  You should breathe a sigh of relief when
you learn that the goals of the debian-women project do *not* include
siphoning people away from -mentors or -devel.  Quite the contrary.
And if individual subscribers choose to take refuse in debian-women and
never do venture out to those other lists, what is that to you?
(That's a rhetorical question - no need to feel the need to answer it.)

Also, ponder whether you are equally concerned when a post which really
should go to debian-user ends up on debian-mentors.  Or when a post
that ideally is topical for debian-project ends up on debian-vote,
simply because there is something to do with a vote involved.  Or when
a post which concerns the installer winds up on debian-devel rather
than debian-boot.

Face it, there is plenty of overlap between existing debian lists.  And
not everyone knows which list is the best to post to in every
circumstance, no matter how you document it.

If it really bothers you that much, feel free to subscribe to
debian-women so that you don't miss any of the exciting material you
expected to see on debian-mentors.  I don't hear anyone except you
complaining about the burden of being on one too many mailing lists as
a result of this.


(BTW, don't expect much more out of me than what I'm posting now.  In
our encounter on IRC the other day, I kept trying to find out if you
had more questions that we hadn't answered already, and all I got was
you rehashing the same few questions over and over, apparently hoping
for new answers that suited your preconceptions better than the answers
we'd already given.  So if I ignore your further responses, it will
probably be because they are, in my judgment, covering ground we have
been over many times already.)

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: