The debian-private mailing list leak, part 1. Volunteers have complained about Blackmail. Lynchings. Character assassination. Defamation. Cyberbullying. Volunteers who gave many years of their lives are picked out at random for cruel social experiments. The former DPL's girlfriend Molly de Blanc is given volunteers to experiment on for her crazy talks. These volunteers never consented to be used like lab rats. We don't either. debian-private can no longer be a safe space for the cabal. Let these monsters have nowhere to hide. Volunteers are not disposable. We stand with the victims.
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: "purity" package

At 08:15 PM 11/29/97 +0000, you wrote:
>On 29 Nov 1997, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>
>> >>"Enrique" == Enrique Zanardi <ezanardi@ull.es> writes:
>> 
>> Enrique> I think we should have the power to decide what goes and what
>> Enrique> doesn't go in our distribution. It's not as simple as "don't
>> Enrique> install it!" when you have already paid for the CDs!
>> 
>> 	Now that is an specious argument indeed. I now live in a state
>[...]
>>  prevailing wind, here in the heart of Dixie.
>
>We (Debian) are ~200 people from all over the world, with different
>religions, different cultures, different views. I guess that puts us in a
>better possition to avoid that kind of short-sighted decissions.
>
>> Enrique> And who draws the line? We as a whole do it, as we do (or
>> Enrique> want to do) with every policy decision. What's wrong with
>> Enrique> Debian deciding "foo" doesn't belong to Debian GNU/Linux
>> Enrique> distribution?
>> 
>> 	In things like religious freedom and freedom of speech, the
>>  tyranny of the majority is not often the best solution. If freedom of
>>  speech is merely what is decided on by the majority, then truly you
>>  do not have fredom of speech.
>
>We are not talking about freedom of speech. We are not going to remove
>all that evil/dirty/nasty/Microsoft/foo programs from the Internet. 
>It's only that we don't want to distribute them. Why do we have to? 
>Do we really have to distribute every collection of bytes anybody cares 
>to package in a deb file? Isn't there something about "Quality" implied?
>(Yes, I know "Quality" is not an absolute magnitude. Let's leave the
>detailed definition for another thread).

I agree 100% here.  What does this package do to increase the quality of
debian. I would think most people would think that it decreases the quality.
Even if you aren't turn'ed off by the type of questions, do they add
anything of value to Debian, or are they just plain stupid, which means it
distracts from the quality.  Games like Quake or Doom, while they may be
violent, are not stupid, because they are fun, and 99.9% of the people who
use them realize that it's all fantasy.  (if not 100%, cause I've never
heard of someone murdering someone because he felt from quake that it was
normal behavior.)

The value system I have now, would prefer that it isn't included.  However,
I don't like placing my beliefs on other people, but their are other issues
that need to be looked at, such as the legal issues, and the main issue of
what debian is really meant to be.

Shaya


--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-private-request@lists.debian.org . 
Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .