Re: No goals, selective memory, be nice, red nose day
On 2004-08-25 11:21:06 +0100 Ricardo Mones <email@example.com> wrote:
The weakness I was referring to is assuming that the problem is a
lists-only problem, not that the evidences of the problem are weak
the problem doesn't exist, as you are trying to infer.
Why do so many posters to debian-women seem to think that they have a
hotline into my brain? Please, consider carefully before telling me
what I am trying to do.
Anyway, the assumption given is the strongest that I want to make, for
different reasons to those you stated. I think it is sufficient and
there's little need to make any broader assumption for this example.
Can we leave that there?
In the archives there are 17 posts on June, 325 on July and, ATM,
current month. This list has just born yesterday and you dare to
examples from such minimal amount of biased mail? [...]
Shouldn't more than 2 of the 650+ posts result in a redirection if
such things are going to happen? There are posts (on style guides, for
example) which seem pretty clearly appropriate for -doc, but were not
redirected, as far as I noticed. The "counter-example" you dismissed
is when redirection was attempted but did not occur, which isn't a
counter-example, but one of only two examples found.
I don't know all of the posts as well as some of you, so yes, I only
spotted those two and I "dare to request examples". Does asking for
other opinions really justify derision, or have I misunderstood your
meaning of that phrase?
Is there much chance that an open mailing list will ever reach a
recognisable stable status? I suspect there will be too many
disturbances. I would be happier dismissing the early posts as
"biased" if there was the normal new list administrivia in there, but
there wasn't much that I found.
If in a couple or three years we still see the same distribution of
on the lists that we have today then you may talk of such ghetto
Has someone measured the current gender distribution of lists? If not,
how will we know whether things have changed?
Well, as exposed before I think they're grounded on your beliefs,
real data. [...]
It's called a hypothesis, based on the few examples I have. Feel free
to disprove it, but don't attack me for trying to explain it. I could
equally well point out that your statements are grounded on your
beliefs and you haven't provided any data either.
MJ Ray wrote:
Anyway, how would you feel if I wrote "I expected better grounded
objections"? I don't think this style of closing is noble.
I don't think my style on closing has any relevance on the matters
discussed here, but if you want to distract audience with "ad hominem"
arguments then we better end the thread here. [...]
"ad hominem" seems to refer to criticising an argument because of the
person making it. I criticised your writing style, not you. As far as
I can remember, I didn't know anything about you before this thread
and I still don't know much else about you.
I may have misunderstood your meaning again: I have never learned
Latin, like most who attended former secondary modern schools. I can
understand several languages, but not much Latin. Please try to avoid
putting crucial parts of your message in Latin if you want to be surer
that I understand it.
MJR/slef My Opinion Only and not of any group I know
http://www.ttllp.co.uk/ for creative copyleft computing
Please email about: BT alternative for line rental+DSL;
Education on SMEs+EU FP6; office filing that works fast