On Sat, Aug 21, 2004 at 09:57:34AM -0700, Carla Schroder wrote: > On Saturday 21 August 2004 5:49 am, Andrew Suffield wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 20, 2004 at 05:03:10PM -0700, Carla Schroder wrote: > > > On Friday 20 August 2004 4:15 pm, Andrew Suffield wrote: > > > > On Fri, Aug 20, 2004 at 11:04:42AM -0700, Carla Schroder wrote: > > > > > > > > Anybody who has any trouble dealing with the sort of thing you > > > > describe, is *far* too unstable to be allowed anywhere near package > > > > maintainance, or anything else involving users. > > > > > > Oh that's good, trash all kinds of people you know nothing about. > > > > I know precisely one thing about them, which is the thing that I > > defined the group with, and I draw conclusions based on that thing. > > You're not serious? Is this some kind of subtle humor? You think it's OK to > draw sweeping conclusions based on miniscule evidence? It's neither accurate > nor analytical, so "OK" is the best you can do, I suppose. On the contrary, this is the mechanism on which all logic is founded (deduction of implication). You specify the antecedent, and draw conclusions from it; in any case where the antecedent is true, the conclusions are also true. No other information is required or relevant. You appear to be advocating discrimination based on irrelevant data (goodness knows what), which is amusing since that's the very thing you like to object so loudly to. We don't do that sort of thing around here. > > > Legalistic nitpicking. Where there are differences, reasonable people of > > > goodwill try to find common ground. Why are you defending poor behavior? > > > > Because that common ground is a myth, and the only poor behaviour *I* > > see here is yours. > > If disagreeing with you is poor behavior, OMG so guilty. Now you're quoting me out of context and constructing a straw man. This sort of thing *will not fly* in Debian. People are not stupid enough to fall for it. > > > > > It is pretty bad- I'm > > > > > involved in a lot of online communities, and Debian is definitely the > > > worst > > > > > of the lot. > > > > > > > > Eris' beard, where have you *been*? > > > > > > > > > > What does that mean? That because my experiences are different from yours, > > > mine are not valid? > > > > That I cannot reconcile them with the world I know. > > That's an awfully limited, self-centered viewpoint. You're saying that nothing > anyone else says has any validity, unless for whatever whimsical reason you > decide it does. No I didn't. Another straw man. > > > I don't even know why you are here, except to snipe. Do you have anything > > > positive to contribute? Since you apparently don't like anything about > D-W, > > > why are you here? Any dolt can be against anything, that takes zero > ability > > > or intelligence. It's a lot harder to be constructive. > > > > It is very easy to construct something; any child can do it. It is far > > harder to construct something worthwhile, and even more so to discard > > the parts that are not. > > > > That's not an answer. Right. I do not feel obliged to provide one. I should have clipped a little more when quoting. -- .''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield : :' : http://www.debian.org/ | `. `' | `- -><- |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature