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

Sven Rudolph wrote:
> 
> First: You are asking the wrong question. 
> [...]
> So the question is "Why it is necessary for Debian to ban this
> material?" 
> 
> Second: This is not about inserting hamsters, it is about
> joking on purists who believe every stupid story as long as it matches
> their moral superstitions.

> Third: [...] the purity program isn't culturally
> compatible with the major target countries for the Debian operating
> system.
> 
> Fourth:  Whenever someone uploads a cooking
> receipt database he will have to provide an extra part with pig
> receipts that will be placed in no-pig-eating. 
> 
> Conclusion: The approach of pleasing each deviation in religion or
> culture with a Debian subsection is to fail. 

Agreed 110% with all you said.


> As Vincent Renardias <vincent@waw.com> wrote:
> :  We already have enough problems with the 'non-us' stuff by
> : now. Let's not make the situation even more complicated (and
> : US-centric).
> Cited and agreed.

mee too.

>  The no-discrimination clause in the DFSG explicitly requires
> licences to omit restrictions based on personal moral principles
> like genetic research.

I felt strange when I heard that sentence on the first time. I don't
understand what's against "genetic research". I would have liked to add 
	"or even pedophily"
at the end of that sentence.


> The only arguments that
> are to be considered are the law (local, national, international).

I can accept that we could be *compelled* by some law to ban some
package from the distribution, but this is quite different from "drawing
such line".

If a line must be drawn, (I mean: if we are compelled to draw a line), I
can accept only a line around technical matters: Linux, Unix,
Programming and Computers. I would also add Science.
I could accept a policy (voted by the majority of the developers, not
the majority of the votants) that ban from the distribution packages
that's out of that line.
This have the side effect to ban the bible also. And any other religious
matter.

But, beware! It's my opinion that the Science is some kind of religion,
and that will not be banned, so don't think that this line would be
"equality".



Fabrizio
-- 
| fpolacco@icenet.fi    fpolacco@debian.org    fpolacco@pluto.linux.it
| Pluto Leader - Debian Developer & Happy Debian 1.3.1 User - vi-holic
| 6F7267F5 fingerprint 57 16 C4 ED C9 86 40 7B 1A 69 A1 66 EC FB D2 5E


--
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 .