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

Re: FYI: debian-legal is discussing the inclusion in the Debian archive of "erotic" interactive fiction depicting the sexual abuse of children

(If replying to me via debian-women or debian-legal, please cc me as
I'm not subscribed to those lists.)

On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 3:07 AM, Miriam Ruiz <miriam@debian.org> wrote:

> 3) Up to now, there hasn't been an actual proposal of package to even
> discuss, so the whole debate is abstract and I don't think anyone can
> say anything concrete about something that is not even tangible. I
> repeat: No one has started packagin anything, as far as I know, no one
> has tried to upload anything, no one has made anything apart of
> talking. At least that is my current understanding of the situation.

Nils Dagsson Moskopp has already proposed an outline for a set of
packages for Unteralterbach [1]; presumably that means he's serious
about packaging this for Debian. In addition to that, Bas Wijnen has
already offered to sponsor this package [2], which alarms me even
more. So yes, there is an element of concrete-ness to this debate, and
it's why I've started to actively voice my displeasure about the
entire situation on debian-devel-games (a few days ago I assumed that
this was just an attempt at trolling and promptly ignored it; it looks
like I was wrong).

Due to the above, I'm going to be watching the progress of
Unteralterbach's packaging very closely in the coming months, as well
as opposing this every step of the way. If this actually makes it into
the NEW queue, I have no hesitation on raising this issue again on
-devel and -project, and/or all other steps available to me as a DD to
oppose this (e.g. on the remote chance that this actually passes
through the NEW queue, I'll forward this issue to the tech-ctte, and
sponsor a GR to get Unteralterbach removed from the archive if need


[1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-games/2014/03/msg00103.html
[2] https://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2014/03/msg00055.html

Reply to: