On Feb 7, 2013 6:57 PM, "Marcus Sorensen" <shadow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> My point is that the vote was framed such that if you vote +1 then you 1) > don't trust people 2) want to be like the soviet union and take away > people's freedom. It just seems a bit unfair to start a vote that way. > > I get that someone might feel like enforcing that list conversations say > on list seems a bit nanny-ish. But hopefully it doesn't offend people too > much that they have to follow someone else's rules any time they choose to > work in a community, frequent a business, visit someone else's home, etc. > "Taking away my freedom of choice" just doesn't seem like a valid complaint > in a setting like this. > On Feb 7, 2013 6:40 PM, "Sheng Yang" <sh...@yasker.org> wrote: > >> On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 5:11 PM, Marcus Sorensen <shadow...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > Even though I don't feel strongly about this functionality, the way >> > the vote itself was presented bothers me. Clearly, if you want an >> > email thread to be treated as a public topic that all responses >> > automatically stick to, then you're a communist and trying to take >> > away people's freedom. Never mind that you can still send private >> > emails to someone. >> >> Sorry, I don't get your point. And I am not a communist. >> >> --Sheng >> > >> > I think there are a lot of valid arguments for and against, and for me >> > it boils down to the fact that this is an ASF project, and should >> > stick to what the ASF has set up, irrespective of what other open >> > source projects or lists do. But it seems like a bit of a cheap shot >> > to go after the Godwin's law vote. >> >
