Re: Social Committee proposal
On Fri, 26 Jan 2007 22:49:37 +0100, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt <firstname.lastname@example.org> said:
> Manoj Srivastava <email@example.com> writes:
>> On Fri, 26 Jan 2007 20:21:44 +0000, Lars Wirzenius <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>>> On pe, 2007-01-26 at 13:35 -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>>>> No fucking way, man. No fucking way.
>>> Well, fuck you then. Fuck you and the paranoid ass you rode in on.
>> Very nice. An escalation from a mostly harmless example of
>> swearing at no one in particular, to a viscious attack on the
>> person you are supposed to be having a discussion with.
> Yay, I wanna play too! Bikkit! Green stuffed furry animals!
I guess it must be my cultural back ground, but the humor, if
any was intended, escapes me.
>> And this is the example of the kind of p[erson working on a social
> Well, I have to admit that liw is far better suited to work on a
> social policy than you are. He's at least able to change his opinion
> if confronted with arguments, something that I haven't seen a single
> time in your behavior. In fact, the only behavior I know from you is
> helping to escalate technical discussions to a pure pissing contest,
> usually accompanied by quite polemic and abusive statements from
And here I was, imagining I had been on my best behavious
during this discussion. But I seem to be diving deep, as is often the
case for any discussion on our mailing lists, deep into a flame
war. Let us see if we can keep this one unusually short, shall we?
While this is off topic, and we should take this off list, I
suspect the problem might well be in the quality of arguments you
have presented to me.
For the record, most of the people on tech ctte, and others,
like josip rodin, erinn, helen, and joeyh (and, really, conutless
other people, have made me change my mind. Indeed, vorlon was the
most recent person who had me changing my Spam policies, as an
I am sorry that your mileage has varied.
I do ask for convincing, and rational, arguments to move me
off a position I have taken, for I usually don't take a public stance
without giving it some thought; so you do have your work cut out for
In some ways I do agree with you. I don't think I'll be a good
fit to be on a social committee. My cultural heritage is far
different from most of the people i the project; and since the social
committee seems to be about setting the norms as decided by the
majority, I am not a great fit.
Now, if you want to further declaim how unfit I am for human
discourse, could you please take it off list, or at least change the
subject, and start a new thread that people can more easily kill
Pretty please, with sugar on top?
One nice thing about egotists: they don't talk about other
people. George Carlin
Manoj Srivastava <email@example.com> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C