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

Re: replacing misleading debian.org/security claims



max  <maxwillb@mailfence.com> wrote on 20/01/2022 at 22:51:24+0100:

> January 18, 2022 11:28:48 PM CET "Pierre-Elliott Bécue" <peb@debian.org> wrote:
>
>> if you keep being pushy, ask that you are temporarily prevented to
>> mail debian lists
>
> You didn't actually reply to my question addressed to you.

That's true. The reason is that I have no intent to reply to your
question addressed to me.

Essentially because of your behaviour, but also because I am not part of
the Security Team.

> All you did was publicly threaten me […] with a ban.

I also told you that your actions could be perceived as aggressive (and
the more things go on, the more I'm convinced that it could be more than
a subjective feeling), but it seems you decided to ignore that point.

> (and thus anyone else who might be interested in discussing this
> issue)

Where I live, we usually call this kind of reasoning a sophism. I don't
think that I need to elaborate on this.

> That's some shameful stuff.

Thanks for sharing your opinion on this. In order to spare both of us
some time, let's agree to disagree.

> And yes, if it looks like I stopped posting, it means that I was banned.

If that were to happen, then it would mean a listmaster read what you
said and considered your behaviour was against the Debian Lists
Policy/Code of Conduct/Standard (call it whatever you like), and
therefore it would be quite normal.

Instead of grinding some axe for an unknown reason, and being semi
spamming about that topic (which is quite unimportant, to be fair) for
the last month, feel free to contribute, or, if you don't want to, then
go do something else.

Apart from being annoying, you are achieving nothing here, and we all
have better things to do.

Regards,

-- 
Pierre-Elliott Bécue

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: