Re: Another Non-Free Proposal
On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 08:22:08 -0500, Branden Robinson <firstname.lastname@example.org> said:
> On Fri, Jan 09, 2004 at 09:06:46AM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 09, 2004 at 11:58:46AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
>> > On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 09:53:37AM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
>> > > I don't expect anyone to want to set up a non-free archive
>> > > until a decision is reached to remove non-free. Doing so would
>> > > go a long way to proving it is possible, and thus towards
>> > > defeating their own preference.
>> > Huh? Why do you think the only people able to setup a non-free
>> > archive are ones that want to see it kept in Debian?
>> I did not say *able*. I said *want*. If you are going to argue
>> with me, please at least argue with what I actually stated.
> John, John. That's against the filibustering playbook.
Ah yes. The opposition is obviously not dedicated, interested
in dialogue like we are. They are just fillibustering to prevent the
righteous from getting their message out to the unwashed masses.
Another superb example of argument by rediculing your
opposition, often by imputing underhanded motivation to their cause.
The meek are contesting the will.
Manoj Srivastava <email@example.com> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C