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: No education (was purity)



here we go!

>   Fellows,  since the vast majority of us are trained in
>computer sciences and not in moral sciences, I have the distinct impression
>that the "purity" discussion is comical; in the sense, that the blind is
>guiding the blind.  I do not suppose that someone who is not a
>mathematician should be lecturing in mathematics, any more than
>that a car mechanic should not insist on quantum mechanics.

Well I don't know about you, but I consider myself human, and while I'm
not trained in computer science, nor moral sciences I dare say that I have
my open opinions about both.  Now I should hope that you as a member of
society DO INDEED have some opinions about moral issues.

And that goes to everybody out there.   I have my own, and yet I choose
not to share them with you, not because I consider them irrelevant, or
that I'm not trained in computer science, but because in as far as it
pertains to "purity" they are irrelevant.

The point is the package exists; it's been around for at least 8 years 
and most of us have run across it once or twice.

As for whether to include this in the main distribution or not, that is
a question that belongs to the distribution manager/leader, and I'll
support either decision they make.

However one should take into mind the debian policy rules which dictate
what is free and what is not, which in turn puts the packages in their
proper destination.  It doesn't not contain any bits regarding the denial
of packages containing questionable material.  Should the decision be
to disallow the "purity" package, then the policy should be modified to
reflect this type of decision, preferably being as explicit as possible
to prevent any ambiguity as to whether something is allowed or not.  One
could for example be confused by the presence of "fortune" which can get
interesting sometimes. 

>  If you think that ethics is a subject that we "intuitively know", I
>dare say you are sadly mistaken. Though I have had some *formal* education
>in this area I am far from knowing how to advice you. THE EXPERTS DO NOT
>KNOW EITHER; at least, not enough to be of any help. It saddens me to observe 
>that the same people who express opinions are the same ones who are
>not familiar with the terms that they are using. No need to say more.

To ask the question: "Is murder OK?" is easy enough, and everybody has the
answer to it, whether it be "yes", or "no".  I guess what you call an 
expert understands the question best, but has no better answer to give you than
you do yourself.  Everything is dependent on context, and so is "purity".
As for whether it should be included in the main debian dist, I don't know and
I don't care.  I leave this question to be answered by the people that brought
up the whole "purity" thing.

Once they make a final decision, perhaps they can justify it, and make the
proper changes to the debian policy manual, etc....

Radu


--
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 .