Re: Response to "Position Statement to the Dunc-Tanc "experiment""
Sorry for the wording but it's way more than I can take:
On 10/27/06, Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> wrote:
[...]
> - How is the success of this "experiment" measured? (For the release as
> well as for the entire project)
An "experiment" is successful as long as it provides useful information.
What the fuck is this definition of "successful"??!
It's so stupid I wonder whether you're playing smarts thinking you're
addressing idiots in your reply, and you believe you can get away with
it; or if you're actually mentally deficient, which I'd rather hope
not.
Both makes me wanna puke. I'm reaching the conclusion that electing
you as DPL was the worst "experiment" Debian has ever gotten itself
into. This opinion being based solely on your sayings and acts about
this "experiment", as I don't know you, and don't care anymore about
what you've done before (good or bad).
Indeed, do you actually /think/ about what you write on public
mailing-lists, and keep in mind that even when you're not posting as
"leader@debian.org", you're actually the DPL in charge anyway? Or is
the whole concept of "leadership" and the accompanying
responsibilities totally unknown to you?
Understanding that "successful" has nothing to do with "useful" is
probably within the reach of a 10-year-old kid... I guess the vast
majority of d-d-a readers can spot the difference as well!
Here's an example of "successful" experiment based on such metrics:
fatal human experimentation of new drugs (the patient dies, but at
least the scientists/doctors can collect useful data. I doubt they'd
call it a "successful experiment" though). There are many more
examples but I'd rather avoid falling under Godwin's Law (though,
according to the rule, it would probably end the thread).
T-Bone
PS: I won't annoy anyone with further emails, this was the last one,
so no need to send me "please stop being an arse" and the like.
--
Thibaut VARENE
http://www.parisc-linux.org/~varenet/
Reply to: