Re: Proposal: Keep non-free
On Tue, Feb 24, 2004 at 09:33:44AM +0000, MJ Ray wrote:
> On 2004-02-24 03:57:55 +0000 Craig Sanders <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> >On Mon, Feb 23, 2004 at 01:17:13AM +0000, MJ Ray wrote:
> >>As you write it, this is an unreasonable demand: who judges it?
> >"who judges" is a trivially easy question to answer: "we all do".
> >when no
> >debian developer can be bothered producing a non-free package, that's
> >sufficient proof that there is no more need for non-free packages.
> I already dealt with that unreasonable position in another email.
i have no doubt that you *think* you did exactly that.
> >btw, it's not at all unreasonable to expect uninvolved third-parties (i.e.
> >you bigots) to mind their own business.
> It's not at all unreasonable to expect you pro-non-free bigots to shut up and
> let us actually use the decision process we have, instead of saying "don't
> mention the non-free. I did once, but I think I got away with it." If you
> still want to package or use non-free, then express your view. If the
> decision goes against you, maintain it some place else. Quit trying to
> sabotage the project by insisting we must irrationally keep non-free after
> its support has waned too much.
are you capable of an original thought, or are you limited to just twisting
what someone else said and throwing it back at them.
in most countries, that style of "debate" is no longer considered clever or
cute after the age of 5. it must be different where-ever you come from.
> Again, I see you have "seconded" something which we still don't know is mule
> or fowl. Do you think you seconded an amendment or a new proposal?
i'm not as thick as you. i'm quite capable of determining whether the proposal
is worthwhile, even if you aren't.
i really don't care whether it is an amendment or a new proposal. i'm happy