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

Re: [AMENDMENT]: Release Etch now, with source-less but legal and freely licensed firmware

On Fri, Oct 06, 2006 at 07:50:49AM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
> Sven Luther <sven.luther@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
> > List masters, this is evidence that Frans is not going to stop this, and as i
> > asked yesterday, i now re-iterate the demand for his ban from debian-vote.
> Come on, calm down.  That one was neither insulting nor attacking.  

Ah, no ? It nothing else it is false, and it is an attack.

It claims that i "tendency to take disagreement as a personal insult of his
intelligence", which is not the case, i take badly people unwilling to take an
argumented position, and then resorting to ad-hominem attacks, and the kind of
"i already told you so many times" i have been getting here, while at the same
time they never say things clearly, and discard anything i say as the raving
of a madman or whatever, not counting the numerous tries to shut me up i get
from various irc channels.

It mentions my "inability to properly read and really consider arguments from
others", just because i don't give up on repetitious bashing and hammering of
arguments which are poorly substantivated by arguments, and there is evidence
that others in this thread, including Frans himself, are indeed not even
reading what i write.

He mentions me always wanting to get the last word, while they refuse
argumentation and try to shut me up on menace, and resort to such tactics as
banning from project or mailing lists, because they happen to have the power
to do so, instead of providing valable argumentation, and accepting countering
arguments if they happen to be wrong.

Then it further claims that i "say" i want to obtain consensus, while at the
same time doing all their possible to stop me from being able to reach such
consensus, not wanting to discuss possible better wording, and propose

How can this discussion go forward and be ended in a reasonable way, if some
of the parties who need to be reached consensus with are unwilling to play the
game, and resort to insidious ad-hominem attacks ? 

And this behaviour has been coming from Frans since last fall, and he did so
on purpose as he told me on irc, and is nothing but an attempt to totally
discredit me, since he and others (like Steve Langasek), are bathed in
respectability, so they have the upper hand in these discussions, even though
they are on shacky argumentative ground.

And no, if they don't like my arguments and position, it is unacceptable to
resort to such ad-hominem attacks. They should provide proper argumentation,
and not always come repeating those same dubious and shaky ones, and they
should take in account counter arguments, as i have modified the initial
proposal and position based on feedback (and even on flames here). If nothing
else, they should respect the time i spent on this issue, as i respect the
time they spend on their respective areas of interest.

This is not what is happening, so saying calm down is fine, but i have been
under this kind of stuff since over a year now, and i can't take it anymore.


Sven Luther

Reply to: