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

Re: Debian UK

Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> wrote:
> I believe there is some animosity due to the opt-out issue but that's
> not what I'm focused on since it's not terribly interesting. [...]

No, not interesting, until something you disagree with is done
in your name without consent.  When it's a technical question,
everyone flames quickly for freedom or the demonstrably
best, but it feels the other way on ethical questions now.
The particular cases may not worry many people yet, but the
character assassination and disrespect is disturbing me.

It's claimed that I'm in a minority of UK DDs in not wanting
any assocation with DUS. That's a non-argument. It's not good
to ignore basic rights just because you think only a minority
is affected.  Do we really need debian to agree to the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights? At the moment, would it do so?

I've been trying to resolve these problems with the DUS
leaders since the constitution was announced in March, pointing
likely defects in the pub draft (in public and private) and
suggesting they use a good example instead, but I've never been
universally popular with UK DDs: I'm not a computer scientist,
I don't drink enough, I'm not diplomatic enough and I call
bugs bugs. With technical things, that doesn't matter, as
in the end, you can demonstrate or test it. Law doesn't do
that so easily. Ultimately, I've researched this and am sure
enough, but I'm going to do the minimum possible to fix it to
my satisfaction now, which includes explaining this here!

Good luck with discovering debian's attitude to commerce,
whatever the outcome.

Best wishes,
MJ Ray (slef), K. Lynn, England, email see http://mjr.towers.org.uk/

Reply to: