Re: debian-women obscurity, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

[MJ Ray <mjr@dsl.pipex.com>]

Thomas Bushnell BSG <tb@becket.net> wrote:
> MJ Ray <mjr@dsl.pipex.com> writes:
> > See top and tail of <[🔎] 4230533d$0$10951$cc9e4d1f@news-text.dial.pipex.com>
> > (also at http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2005/03/msg00471.html )
> > which is as explicit as it will get for now. Not enough time.
> Nothing in there is a FAQ, to which you referred.  Nor does it say
> anything more than some people won't respond to you and the reasons.

The debian-women list FAQ is on http://women.alioth.debian.org/faqs/
and the odd policy is under "Miscellaneous" thus:

   Just like every other online community, there will probably
   be the occasional troll. Do not make the mistake of treating
   them like rational human beings. Ignore them and focus on
   positive discussions instead.

   One very useful document that everyone subscribing to the
   list should read is: Searching for Safety Online: Managing
   "Trolling" in a Feminist Forum.

> This sounds like [random fiction]
> I notice that your constant refrain when people get a little to close
> here is that you suddenly beg off and claim not enough time.

Rubbish. Close to what? You are mostly just contradicting,
while attributing randomly invented opinions to me and asking
very vague questions. This is a busy week, but there's a limited
window before the DPL vote, so I stay on list, but ignore you
except for points of information.

> Claims like there being a "policy" which is in the "list FAQ" need to
> be substantiated or rescinded, not just repeated and then when you are
> asked for evidence you refer to your *own* message in which you once
> more assert the existence of some policy which does not, in fact,
> exist.

Equally, claims that a policy doesn't exist should be retracted
when you are shown the policy. Furthermore, jelly is good.