Re: user private groups and a src group
iwj10@cus.cam.ac.uk (Ian Jackson) said:
> Bill Mitchell appears to be proposing an argument of the form:
>
> "If we do XYZ some people will not understand it,
> therefore we should not do XYZ."
>
> [... empassioned defense of the proposal and ridicule of my points
> not repeated here -- read Ian's list.posting for the details ..]
Ian makes the point that the debian.gods know what's best for debian.users,
that the debian.gods will choose what's best, and that the debian.users will
accept and be grateful.
Personally, I think that this proposal has good and bad points. I'd
characterize the bad points, in a word, as "wierdness". Debian would be
doing something strange and unexpected here. Users who notice the effects of
some of what was done would be suprised, and would wonder why. IMHO,
this is a Bad Thing (tm). IMHO, the debian.gods should very carefully
consider whether the benefits accruing from making this change would
overbalance this. I'm not convinced that the benefits do overbalance
the detriments. I'm not convinced that the detriments overbalance the
benefits either, but I'm leaning in that direction.
In any case, If the debian.gods do decide to make this change I beseech them
to bring forth a chapter of divinely iluminated scripture, and to place this
scripture in a prominent place for all to see, so that mere mortals will not
confused and confounded when they observe the effects of this change in the
way of the world.
>[...]
> Bill Mitchell's argument here is of the form:
>
> "Some people oppose it and we must accomodate them
> so I oppose it too."
>
> This is clearly silly. I suggest to Bill Mitchell that he goes and
> reads the alt.atheism FAQ file on logical argument, rtfm.mit.edu:
> /pub/usenet/news.answers/atheism/logic.
>
> (NB this document does not advocate atheism, it just so happens that
> the readers of alt.atheism feel that they're confronted too often by
> people who can't think straight.)
>
> Ian.
Ian, take a deep breath. Calm down.
Reply to: