Nathan E Norman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Fri, Mar 07, 2003 at 01:38:48PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote: > > "Joe Moore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > > 2. the Chinese Dissident. > > > > > > It has been suggested that this test be referred to as simply as the > > > "Dissident" test. > > > > But the suggestion has not been taken. The point isn't to hammer at > > China--though such hammering seems well warranted--but to point to a > > *particular* kind of government repression, and not government > > repression in general. The Soviet Union would do as well. > > That's silly. I think people understand what a dissident is. For > instance, I may decide to join the Posse Comitatus[1] and write some > code for them. I probably don't want to release that code so the US > government can see it. Or, I may join the anti-Branden-Robinson cabal. > It does not matter who the authorities are; the dissident wishes to > avoid revealing her plans to them.
Of course. But the point is to highlight a case where we are generally in *great support* and *sympathy* with the dissidents, not a case where we would rather they go away, or think it's trivial and unimportant. The point is to highlight a case where you not merely don't want someone to see it, but where you have a significant chance of being *executed* or put in *prison for life* if it gets seen by the wrong people. Like I said, "Soviet dissident" would do as well; so would "dissident in Nazi Germany". But "Indian dissident" or "Posse comitatus dissident" just doesn't do the trick. So I use the phrase "Chinese dissident", and I think I'm the one to first frame the test in question on debian-legal in these terms at all. Thomas