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

Re: Proposal - Deferment of Changes from GR 2004-003

Craig Sanders <cas@taz.net.au> writes:

> no, telling the truth does not make someone a cad.  you ARE a lying piece of
> shit, and you ARE a worthless low-life bag of pus.

Well, here we just disagree, don't we?  I think that calling people a
"lying piece of shit" and a "worthless low-life bag of pus" is right
near the definition of what it is to be a cad.

I'm not sure we will come to agreement about this, but I don't think
we need to.  You can continue to think I'm a lying piece of shit, and
I'll continue to think you're a cad.  

I invite you to continue to express your opinions, since they only
serve in my opinion to make clear to everyone what your character is. 

> your display of mock-innocence is very boring.  you're not even very good at
> it.

Well, I may or may not be innocent.  I haven't claimed to be.
Actually, I invited people to let me know if they think I'm being
unreasonable.  You'll understand if I don't put too much weight on
your opinions, I hope.

I also don't particular care if I'm boring or not.  I do seem to have
captivated your attention, for what it's worth.

> obviously you can not see the difference between labelling a THING as
> unprincipled and slandering a person as unprincipled.  

What do you think of a person who adopts an unprincipled position?  Is
that person principled or unprincipled?  Or some third possibility?

> so it's somehow wrong to state things plainly and unambigiously, yet it's
> virtuous to make insults while pretending innocence?

No, it's wrong to use abusive and hateful language, whether accurately
or inaccurately.  This has been explained to you many times, but I'm
happy to continue to repeat it as many times as you ask me.

> look at *every* single instance where we have argued.  it is
> self-evident that it is you smarmily attacking me, and then
> pretending to be outraged when i respond.  

You seem to want to convince me, which is unlikely to happen.  Or are
you trying to convince the onlookers?  Please, continue.  You only
hurt yourself with each such diatribe.  But go ahead, prove it to the
world.  Shout your filth from the rooftops!  

Don't be surprised when the general negative perception of you only
grows further and  further.

> in short, you look eagerly for opportunities to have a go at me, whereas i
> would much prefer to just ignore you.  this is because you are an arsewipe.

Feel free to ignore me.

> finally, to understate things somewhat: it is obvious that i don't
> like you and you don't like me.  why don't you just ignore me?  then
> you won't have to expend the effort required to lie and i wont have
> to respond to your lying crap.

I don't ignore you entirely because you say things to which I feel
inclined to reply, and when you do, I reply.

We could take a poll, say, a GR to vote on whether I or you are the
more reprehensible person.  The results might be interesting.  I'm not
sure it's worth the effort, since you'll still pretend to be the
aggrieved party, even as you are the chief violator of every rule of
civility yet constructed for Debian.


PS to the listmaster: Please let me know if you don't want to receive
anything more from me; I'm only sending to you because Craig decided
to start doing so.  I have my doubts about whether you really want
it.  Also, please note that Craigs messages are in violation of the
Debian list policy code of conduct.

Reply to: