Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] I am really getting sick of this. Goodbye

[awakeyet]

Mark I don't appreciate how you want to make yourself appear high and mighty 
and unbiased but at the end you say "Please, everyone, stop feeding the 
trolls." as if you could never consider the possiblity that I'm anything but. 
really hurts even coming from a stranger. 



25. Mar 2017 15:31 by m...@netris.org:


> Jens Lody <> fed...@jenslody.de> > writes:
>
>> As long as others answer to your mails (as I do at the moment), it's
>> not possible to "mark you as spam". To much broken threads would be the
>> result.
>>
>> You behave like a classical agent provocateur and if I would follow you
>> own arguments, I could say you are a NSA agent or work for a competitor
>> of icecat and you try to destroy this project.
>
> It's natural for anyone to want to respond to accusations such as these,
> so the effect of your email will be to *strongly* encourage another
> response from awakeyet.  You seem to agree that this would be an
> undesirable outcome, so please stop responding.
>
>> I believe (hope?) your purposes are the best, but the result is
>> disastrous in my opinion.
>
> Agreed.  Similarly, I believe that you had good intentions in writing
> this message, but the predictable result is not good.
>
> Please, everyone, stop feeding the trolls.
>
>  Mark
>
> --
> http://gnuzilla.gnu.org--
http://gnuzilla.gnu.org

Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] I am really getting sick of this. Goodbye

[awakeyet]

I could say the exact same things about you. I invite everyone to read the 
entire history of all the emails I have been a part of. you can clearly see my 
good intent and where I'm coming from. you haven't seen the horrors that I've 
seen. you haven't seen what agents looks like. they have torn apart such great 
communities before for such petty reasons. I want everyone to be aware so that 
it does not happen here. I believe those who try to silence me are the actual 
agents. again I invite everyone to read all my past emails in their full entire 
history.


24. Mar 2017 20:22 by fed...@jenslody.de:


> Am Sat, 25 Mar 2017 00:19:53 +0100 (CET)
> schrieb <> awake...@tutanota.de> >:
>
>> oh, playing nice now? I knew you wouldn't mark me as spam. you want
>> to continue this game, what a surprise.
>>
> You "argue" as if you want to make as much users move away from icecat.
> You spam this mailing list in a way, that might discourage people from
> subscribing to the list or make others unsubscribe.
> As long as others answer to your mails (as I do at the moment), it's
> not possible to "mark you as spam". To much broken threads would be the
> result.
>
> You behave like a classical agent provocateur and if I would follow you
> own arguments, I could say you are a NSA agent or work for a competitor
> of icecat and you try to destroy this project.
>
> I believe (hope?) your purposes are the best, but the result is
> disastrous in my opinion.
>
> Jens
>
>> 24. Mar 2017 18:59 by >> onp...@riseup.net>> :
>>
>>
>> >
>> > I'm afraid I won't argue with unsubstantiated speculation. However,
>> > if you would like to answer the questions I have asked, that will
>> > get us on track toward a proper debate based on evidence.
>> >
>> > --
>> > Julie Marchant
>> > >> https://onpon4.github.io
>> > On Mar 24, 2017 6:41 PM, > >> awake...@tutanota.de>> >  wrote:
>> >  
>> >>   I see what you're doing here, you're playing game of
>> >> questions with me and being very evasive while pretending to have
>> >> no idea what I am talking about, while also simultaneously giving
>> >> yourself the unfounded excuse to back up your own flawed argument
>> >> that "I'm wrong" for "no mentioned facts or reasons" without
>> >> actually providing evidence that supports your claims against me
>> >> even though I'm the one always pointing out the truth because I
>> >> want people to wake up. How convenient that you never show my
>> >> previous full reply in your messages to me so that people find it
>> >> more difficult to follow this wild goose chase back and forth you
>> >> are trying to play me with. I said it before and I'll say it
>> >> again, if you don't like me for any reason, mark my emails as
>> >> spam. I honestly do not enjoy our interactions and I politely
>> >> request that you Julie, personally mark me as spam once and for
>> >> all. But I know you wont, because that doesn't accomplish your
>> >> goals does it? I'm not sorry and nobody is going to shut me up. I
>> >> love helping people so please I kindly ask that you prove me wrong
>> >> and don't message me again.
>> >>
>> >> 24. Mar 2017 09:01 by >> >> onp...@riseup.net>> >> :
>> >>
>> >>  
>> >>> On 03/24/2017 07:09 AM, >>> >> awake...@tutanota.de>> >>>  wrote:  
>>  I point out your missteps in logic  
>> >>>
>> >>> Where did you do this, and what "missteps in logic" are you
>> >>> talking about? 
>>  you suddenly shift your argument if I may call it that to the
>>  opposite of what you appeared to originally intend to say.  
>> >>>
>> >>> What did you perceive me as originally intending to say, and what
>> >>> part of my message made you perceive that?
>> >>>  
>>  you don't actually want to provide a logical argument that shows
>>  any facts and reasons why what I said wasn't good enough for
>>  you.  
>> >>>
>> >>> I didn't respond to your email to argue against it. I responded
>> >>> to your email to ask you to stop flooding my mailbox, as at the
>> >>> time you had sent eight emails in quick succession for no good
>> >>> reason.
>> >>>
>> >>> I did of course argue against what you were saying, but it's a
>> >>> very simple argument that you could easily refute if you are on
>> >>> the side of truth:
>> >>>
>> >>> 1. There is no evidence to support your hypothesis.
>> >>>
>> >>> 2. There is no reasonable motivation for any known party to do
>> >>> what you suggest.
>> >>>
>> >>> I can't prove that there isn't a conspiracy going on any more
>> >>> than you could prove that the tooth fairy isn't real. But you can
>> >>> either show evidence that supports your hypothesis, or at least
>> >>> start by showing a credible motivation someone could have to want
>> >>> to sabotage IceCat and not, say, Tor Browser.
>> >>>  
>>  I love it how everyone is mentioning TOR but they all fail to
>>  mention the important details like how extremely slow it is, the
>>  lack of functionality, and how many times it has been
>>  compromised. 

Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] I am really getting sick of this. Goodbye

[awakeyet]

How dare you call me a troll. because you disagree with me? you only seek to 
discredit me because you don't like what I say. you're nothing different than 
an internet social justice warrior. please do not message me again.

24. Mar 2017 22:08 by m...@netris.org:


> Go away troll, or else I'll take steps to ban you from this list.
> This is your final warning.
>
>   Mark
>
>
> <> awake...@tutanota.de> > writes:
>
>> I see what you're doing here, you're playing game of questions with me
>> and being very evasive while pretending to have no idea what I am
>> talking about, while also simultaneously giving yourself the unfounded
>> excuse to back up your own flawed argument that "I'm wrong" for "no
>> mentioned facts or reasons" without actually providing evidence that
>> supports your claims against me even though I'm the one always
>> pointing out the truth because I want people to wake up.  How
>> convenient that you never show my previous full reply in your messages
>> to me so that people find it more difficult to follow this wild goose
>> chase back and forth you are trying to play me with. I said it before
>> and I'll say it again, if you don't like me for any reason, mark my
>> emails as spam. I honestly do not enjoy our interactions and I
>> politely request that you Julie, personally mark me as spam once and
>> for all. But I know you wont, because that doesn't accomplish your
>> goals does it? I'm not sorry and nobody is going to shut me up. I love
>> helping people so please I kindly ask that you prove me wrong and
>> don't message me again.
>>
>> 24. Mar 2017 09:01 by >> onp...@riseup.net>> :
>>
>>  On 03/24/2017 07:09 AM, >> awake...@tutanota.de>>  wrote:
>>
>>  I point out your missteps in logic
>>
>>  Where did you do this, and what "missteps in logic" are you talking about?
>>
>>  you suddenly shift your argument if I may call it that to the opposite of 
>> what you appeared to originally intend to say.
>>
>>  What did you perceive me as originally intending to say, and what part
>>  of my message made you perceive that?
>>
>>  you don't actually want to provide a logical argument that shows any facts 
>> and reasons why what I said wasn't good enough for you.
>>
>>  I didn't respond to your email to argue against it. I responded to your
>>  email to ask you to stop flooding my mailbox, as at the time you had
>>  sent eight emails in quick succession for no good reason.
>>
>>  I did of course argue against what you were saying, but it's a very
>>  simple argument that you could easily refute if you are on the side of
>>  truth:
>>
>>  1. There is no evidence to support your hypothesis.
>>
>>  2. There is no reasonable motivation for any known party to do what you
>>  suggest.
>>
>>  I can't prove that there isn't a conspiracy going on any more than you
>>  could prove that the tooth fairy isn't real. But you can either show
>>  evidence that supports your hypothesis, or at least start by showing a
>>  credible motivation someone could have to want to sabotage IceCat and
>>  not, say, Tor Browser.
>>
>>  I love it how everyone is mentioning TOR but they all fail to mention the 
>> important details like how extremely slow it is, the lack of functionality, 
>> and how many times it has been
>>  compromised. thanks for the suggestion but I'm very proud of what the 
>> creators of icecat have done.
>>
>>  Matters of convenience like how fast the browser don't matter in this
>>  discussion, because if a malicious party wants to sabotage users'
>>  privacy, they will go for the more popular option no matter how
>>  convenient it is for the users, and given the lack of attention IceCat
>>  has gotten anywhere outside of our little circle and the boost in
>>  attention Tor Browser has gotten from the Snowden revelations, Tor
>>  Browser appears to be more popular. If you have any evidence to show
>>  that IceCat is actually more popular than Tor Browser, please feel free
>>  to present it.
>>
>>  In what way is IceCat more secure than the Tor Browser Bundle? These are
>>  the facts I can see:
>>
>>  1. IceCat is frequently behind its upstream, Firefox, on updates.
>>
>>  2. IceCat includes LibreJS, which selectively stops scripts from
>>  executing based on the presence or absence of a license statement in a
>>  particular format. This means that any malicious party can convince
>>  IceCat to execute JavaScript simply by lying about the license, or
>>  (because the JavaScript infrastructure doesn't enable forking of a
>>  website's JavaScript code, and LibreJS doesn't even support blocking any
>>  scripts it detects as libre) simply making the script libre and keeping
>>  in the malicious functionality. I explained this in my essay,
>>  "Proprietary JavaScript: Fix, or Kill?"[1] Therefore, LibreJS cannot
>>  reliably be protective against any sort of malicious JavaScript code;
>>  its only protective effect is "security through obscurity".
>>
>>  3. When using Tor, IceCat blocks all requests 

Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] I am really getting sick of this. Goodbye

[Mark H Weaver]

Jens Lody  writes:

> As long as others answer to your mails (as I do at the moment), it's
> not possible to "mark you as spam". To much broken threads would be the
> result.
>
> You behave like a classical agent provocateur and if I would follow you
> own arguments, I could say you are a NSA agent or work for a competitor
> of icecat and you try to destroy this project.

It's natural for anyone to want to respond to accusations such as these,
so the effect of your email will be to *strongly* encourage another
response from awakeyet.  You seem to agree that this would be an
undesirable outcome, so please stop responding.

> I believe (hope?) your purposes are the best, but the result is
> disastrous in my opinion.

Agreed.  Similarly, I believe that you had good intentions in writing
this message, but the predictable result is not good.

Please, everyone, stop feeding the trolls.

 Mark

--
http://gnuzilla.gnu.org

Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] I am really getting sick of this. Goodbye

[Gary]

asleepyet wrote:

"everyone = me?"  me me or you me? please clarify.


I meant me but now I'm not the only one...

-but they all fail to mention the important details like how extremely slow
it is


I'm sure they would welcome your expert engineering skills if you'd like to
join the project.

it's just a network?


yes, designed for anonymity based somewhat on the idea of the old email
remailers.

build your own?


Caleb DeLisle did. Have a look at cjdns.

don't get mad at me but I can not in good faith believe you have ever used
TOR before.


I have had to use it in the past for research but not on a daily basis.

TOR strongly advises against making any changes to your TOR browser


You are confusing the network project with the browser project. It's like
assuming Firefox is the Internet.

Please do a search "TOR compromised" "person sent to jail TOR" "TOR exit
nodes compromised" and feel free to be surprised by the results.


Actually, it was only once & the court let the FBI not disclose their
methods. I do follow these things because it's my job to do so.

It's important to use a good browser on a good operating system because
using a good browser on a bad operating system is the same if not worse
(because of the added false sense of security) as using as bad browser on a
bad operating system.

Your contributions to OS & application architecture has been invaluable.
Your employer & colleagues must be very proud.
--
http://gnuzilla.gnu.org

Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] I am really getting sick of this. Goodbye

[Mark H Weaver]

Go away troll, or else I'll take steps to ban you from this list.
This is your final warning.

  Mark


 writes:

> I see what you're doing here, you're playing game of questions with me
> and being very evasive while pretending to have no idea what I am
> talking about, while also simultaneously giving yourself the unfounded
> excuse to back up your own flawed argument that "I'm wrong" for "no
> mentioned facts or reasons" without actually providing evidence that
> supports your claims against me even though I'm the one always
> pointing out the truth because I want people to wake up.  How
> convenient that you never show my previous full reply in your messages
> to me so that people find it more difficult to follow this wild goose
> chase back and forth you are trying to play me with. I said it before
> and I'll say it again, if you don't like me for any reason, mark my
> emails as spam. I honestly do not enjoy our interactions and I
> politely request that you Julie, personally mark me as spam once and
> for all. But I know you wont, because that doesn't accomplish your
> goals does it? I'm not sorry and nobody is going to shut me up. I love
> helping people so please I kindly ask that you prove me wrong and
> don't message me again.
>
> 24. Mar 2017 09:01 by onp...@riseup.net:
>
>  On 03/24/2017 07:09 AM, awake...@tutanota.de wrote:
>
>  I point out your missteps in logic
>
>  Where did you do this, and what "missteps in logic" are you talking about?
>
>  you suddenly shift your argument if I may call it that to the opposite of 
> what you appeared to originally intend to say.
>
>  What did you perceive me as originally intending to say, and what part
>  of my message made you perceive that?
>
>  you don't actually want to provide a logical argument that shows any facts 
> and reasons why what I said wasn't good enough for you.
>
>  I didn't respond to your email to argue against it. I responded to your
>  email to ask you to stop flooding my mailbox, as at the time you had
>  sent eight emails in quick succession for no good reason.
>
>  I did of course argue against what you were saying, but it's a very
>  simple argument that you could easily refute if you are on the side of
>  truth:
>
>  1. There is no evidence to support your hypothesis.
>
>  2. There is no reasonable motivation for any known party to do what you
>  suggest.
>
>  I can't prove that there isn't a conspiracy going on any more than you
>  could prove that the tooth fairy isn't real. But you can either show
>  evidence that supports your hypothesis, or at least start by showing a
>  credible motivation someone could have to want to sabotage IceCat and
>  not, say, Tor Browser.
>
>  I love it how everyone is mentioning TOR but they all fail to mention the 
> important details like how extremely slow it is, the lack of functionality, 
> and how many times it has been
>  compromised. thanks for the suggestion but I'm very proud of what the 
> creators of icecat have done.
>
>  Matters of convenience like how fast the browser don't matter in this
>  discussion, because if a malicious party wants to sabotage users'
>  privacy, they will go for the more popular option no matter how
>  convenient it is for the users, and given the lack of attention IceCat
>  has gotten anywhere outside of our little circle and the boost in
>  attention Tor Browser has gotten from the Snowden revelations, Tor
>  Browser appears to be more popular. If you have any evidence to show
>  that IceCat is actually more popular than Tor Browser, please feel free
>  to present it.
>
>  In what way is IceCat more secure than the Tor Browser Bundle? These are
>  the facts I can see:
>
>  1. IceCat is frequently behind its upstream, Firefox, on updates.
>
>  2. IceCat includes LibreJS, which selectively stops scripts from
>  executing based on the presence or absence of a license statement in a
>  particular format. This means that any malicious party can convince
>  IceCat to execute JavaScript simply by lying about the license, or
>  (because the JavaScript infrastructure doesn't enable forking of a
>  website's JavaScript code, and LibreJS doesn't even support blocking any
>  scripts it detects as libre) simply making the script libre and keeping
>  in the malicious functionality. I explained this in my essay,
>  "Proprietary JavaScript: Fix, or Kill?"[1] Therefore, LibreJS cannot
>  reliably be protective against any sort of malicious JavaScript code;
>  its only protective effect is "security through obscurity".
>
>  3. When using Tor, IceCat blocks all requests for things like images,
>  unlike Tor Browser. This makes it possible for any website to
>  distinguish between Tor Browser and IceCat simply by embedding an image
>  onto the Web page and seeing whether or not the image was sent at the
>  time the Web page was loaded.
>
>  4. Other than LibreJS, which (as I explained) can easily be subverted,
>  IceCat offers no protection against 

Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] I am really getting sick of this. Goodbye

[awakeyet]

oh, playing nice now? I knew you wouldn't mark me as spam. you want to continue 
this game, what a surprise.

24. Mar 2017 18:59 by onp...@riseup.net:


>
> I'm afraid I won't argue with unsubstantiated speculation. However, if you 
> would like to answer the questions I have asked, that will get us on track 
> toward a proper debate based on evidence.
>
> --
> Julie Marchant
> https://onpon4.github.io
> On Mar 24, 2017 6:41 PM, > awake...@tutanota.de>  wrote:
>
>>   I see what you're doing here, you're playing game of questions 
>> with me and being very evasive while pretending to have no idea what I am 
>> talking about, while also simultaneously giving yourself the unfounded 
>> excuse to back up your own flawed argument that "I'm wrong" for "no 
>> mentioned facts or reasons" without actually providing evidence that 
>> supports your claims against me even though I'm the one always pointing out 
>> the truth because I want people to wake up. 
>> How convenient that you never show my previous full reply in your messages 
>> to me so that people find it more difficult to follow this wild goose chase 
>> back and forth you are trying to play me with. I said it before and I'll say 
>> it again, if you don't like me for any reason, mark my emails as spam. I 
>> honestly do not enjoy our interactions and I politely request that you 
>> Julie, personally mark me as spam once and for all. But I know you wont, 
>> because that doesn't accomplish your goals does it? I'm not sorry and nobody 
>> is going to shut me up. I love helping people so please I kindly ask that 
>> you prove me wrong and don't message me again.
>>
>> 24. Mar 2017 09:01 by >> onp...@riseup.net>> :
>>
>>
>>> On 03/24/2017 07:09 AM, >>> awake...@tutanota.de>>>  wrote:
 I point out your missteps in logic
>>>
>>> Where did you do this, and what "missteps in logic" are you talking about?
>>>
 you suddenly shift your argument if I may call it that to the opposite of 
 what you appeared to originally intend to say.
>>>
>>> What did you perceive me as originally intending to say, and what part
>>> of my message made you perceive that?
>>>
 you don't actually want to provide a logical argument that shows any facts 
 and reasons why what I said wasn't good enough for you.
>>>
>>> I didn't respond to your email to argue against it. I responded to your
>>> email to ask you to stop flooding my mailbox, as at the time you had
>>> sent eight emails in quick succession for no good reason.
>>>
>>> I did of course argue against what you were saying, but it's a very
>>> simple argument that you could easily refute if you are on the side of
>>> truth:
>>>
>>> 1. There is no evidence to support your hypothesis.
>>>
>>> 2. There is no reasonable motivation for any known party to do what you
>>> suggest.
>>>
>>> I can't prove that there isn't a conspiracy going on any more than you
>>> could prove that the tooth fairy isn't real. But you can either show
>>> evidence that supports your hypothesis, or at least start by showing a
>>> credible motivation someone could have to want to sabotage IceCat and
>>> not, say, Tor Browser.
>>>
 I love it how everyone is mentioning TOR but they all fail to mention the 
 important details like how extremely slow it is, the lack of 
 functionality, and how many times it has been compromised. thanks for the 
 suggestion but I'm very proud of what the creators of icecat have done.
>>>
>>> Matters of convenience like how fast the browser don't matter in this
>>> discussion, because if a malicious party wants to sabotage users'
>>> privacy, they will go for the more popular option no matter how
>>> convenient it is for the users, and given the lack of attention IceCat
>>> has gotten anywhere outside of our little circle and the boost in
>>> attention Tor Browser has gotten from the Snowden revelations, Tor
>>> Browser appears to be more popular. If you have any evidence to show
>>> that IceCat is actually more popular than Tor Browser, please feel free
>>> to present it.
>>>
>>> In what way is IceCat more secure than the Tor Browser Bundle? These are
>>> the facts I can see:
>>>
>>> 1. IceCat is frequently behind its upstream, Firefox, on updates.
>>>
>>> 2. IceCat includes LibreJS, which selectively stops scripts from
>>> executing based on the presence or absence of a license statement in a
>>> particular format. This means that any malicious party can convince
>>> IceCat to execute JavaScript simply by lying about the license, or
>>> (because the JavaScript infrastructure doesn't enable forking of a
>>> website's JavaScript code, and LibreJS doesn't even support blocking any
>>> scripts it detects as libre) simply making the script libre and keeping
>>> in the malicious functionality. I explained this in my essay,
>>> "Proprietary JavaScript: Fix, or Kill?"[1] Therefore, LibreJS cannot
>>> reliably be protective ag--
http://gnuzilla.gnu.org

Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] I am really getting sick of this. Goodbye

[Julie Marchant]

I'm afraid I won't argue with unsubstantiated speculation. However, if you 
would like to answer the questions I have asked, that will get us on track 
toward a proper debate based on evidence.

--
Julie Marchant
https://onpon4.github.io

On Mar 24, 2017 6:41 PM, awake...@tutanota.de wrote:
>
> I see what you're doing here, you're playing game of questions with me and 
> being very evasive while pretending to have no idea what I am talking about, 
> while also simultaneously giving yourself the unfounded excuse to back up 
> your own flawed argument that "I'm wrong" for "no mentioned facts or reasons" 
> without actually providing evidence that supports your claims against me even 
> though I'm the one always pointing out the truth because I want people to 
> wake up. 
> How convenient that you never show my previous full reply in your messages to 
> me so that people find it more difficult to follow this wild goose chase back 
> and forth you are trying to play me with. I said it before and I'll say it 
> again, if you don't like me for any reason, mark my emails as spam. I 
> honestly do not enjoy our interactions and I politely request that you Julie, 
> personally mark me as spam once and for all. But I know you wont, because 
> that doesn't accomplish your goals does it? I'm not sorry and nobody is going 
> to shut me up. I love helping people so please I kindly ask that you prove me 
> wrong and don't message me again.
>
> 24. Mar 2017 09:01 by onp...@riseup.net:
>
>> On 03/24/2017 07:09 AM, awake...@tutanota.de wrote:
>>>
>>> I point out your missteps in logic
>>
>>
>> Where did you do this, and what "missteps in logic" are you talking about?
>>>
>>> you suddenly shift your argument if I may call it that to the opposite of 
>>> what you appeared to originally intend to say.
>>
>>
>> What did you perceive me as originally intending to say, and what part
>> of my message made you perceive that?
>>>
>>> you don't actually want to provide a logical argument that shows any facts 
>>> and reasons why what I said wasn't good enough for you.
>>
>>
>> I didn't respond to your email to argue against it. I responded to your
>> email to ask you to stop flooding my mailbox, as at the time you had
>> sent eight emails in quick succession for no good reason.
>>
>> I did of course argue against what you were saying, but it's a very
>> simple argument that you could easily refute if you are on the side of
>> truth:
>>
>> 1. There is no evidence to support your hypothesis.
>>
>> 2. There is no reasonable motivation for any known party to do what you
>> suggest.
>>
>> I can't prove that there isn't a conspiracy going on any more than you
>> could prove that the tooth fairy isn't real. But you can either show
>> evidence that supports your hypothesis, or at least start by showing a
>> credible motivation someone could have to want to sabotage IceCat and
>> not, say, Tor Browser.
>>>
>>> I love it how everyone is mentioning TOR but they all fail to mention the 
>>> important details like how extremely slow it is, the lack of functionality, 
>>> and how many times it has been compromised. thanks for the suggestion but 
>>> I'm very proud of what the creators of icecat have done.
>>
>>
>> Matters of convenience like how fast the browser don't matter in this
>> discussion, because if a malicious party wants to sabotage users'
>> privacy, they will go for the more popular option no matter how
>> convenient it is for the users, and given the lack of attention IceCat
>> has gotten anywhere outside of our little circle and the boost in
>> attention Tor Browser has gotten from the Snowden revelations, Tor
>> Browser appears to be more popular. If you have any evidence to show
>> that IceCat is actually more popular than Tor Browser, please feel free
>> to present it.
>>
>> In what way is IceCat more secure than the Tor Browser Bundle? These are
>> the facts I can see:
>>
>> 1. IceCat is frequently behind its upstream, Firefox, on updates.
>>
>> 2. IceCat includes LibreJS, which selectively stops scripts from
>> executing based on the presence or absence of a license statement in a
>> particular format. This means that any malicious party can convince
>> IceCat to execute JavaScript simply by lying about the license, or
>> (because the JavaScript infrastructure doesn't enable forking of a
>> website's JavaScript code, and LibreJS doesn't even support blocking any
>> scripts it detects as libre) simply making the script libre and keeping
>> in the malicious functionality. I explained this in my essay,
>> "Proprietary JavaScript: Fix, or Kill?"[1] Therefore, LibreJS cannot
>> reliably be protective ag--
http://gnuzilla.gnu.org

Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] I am really getting sick of this. Goodbye

[awakeyet]

"everyone = me?"  me me or you me? please clarify.

-but they all fail to mention the important details like how extremely slow it 
is 
"it has many layers -- like an onion."

Oh yea Donkeh lets hang out at mah Swamp woo lets get all Shrek in here 
(because that's a good explanation and suddenly makes TOR lighting fast, but I 
joke)

the lack of functionality, 
"it's just a network. what extra functionality are you hoping to add when you 
build your own?"

it's just a network? build your own? don't get mad at me but I can not in good 
faith believe you have ever used TOR before.  TOR strongly advises against 
making any changes to your TOR browser because the browser benefits with some 
forms of security by all of them looking the same. TOR even tells you to not 
resize your window. 

as for the functionality I'm looking for? I'm looking for the ability to 
actively use the internet properly and do normal people internet things with 
actual functional speed so I'm not stuck by my computer waiting 10 hours for a 
page to load.


and how many times it has been compromised. 
"[citation needed]"

Please do a search "TOR compromised" "person sent to jail TOR" "TOR exit nodes 
compromised" and feel free to be surprised by the results. It's not a perfect 
system. how do you not know this? I'm curious and I ask this in a friendly way. 
I just can't believe it.


thanks for the suggestion but I'm very proud of what the creators of icecat 
have done.

"according to you, all browsers and operating systems feed in to the panopticon 
so what makes IceCat so special?"

I did not say those words in that combination or order, and even in the correct 
order are taken out of context and that's a stretch. to make a simple comment 
on some of the things I said before, It's important to use a good browser on a 
good operating system because using a good browser on a bad operating system is 
the same if not worse (because of the added false sense of security) as using 
as bad browser on a bad operating system.

it's like eating junk food every single day and then eating a salad and 
thinking you are safe or healthy. It's just not true. people who are healthy 
metaphorically speaking eat fruits and vegetables every day, and eat little to 
no junk food. I hope my example is understandable.



24. Mar 2017 10:38 by gdri...@gmail.com:


> asleepyet wrote:
>
>>   I love it how everyone is mentioning TOR
>
> everyone = me
>
>> but they all fail to mention the important details like how extremely slow 
>> it is, 
>
> it has many layers -- like an onion.
>
>> the lack of functionality, 
>
> it's just a network. what extra functionality are you hoping to add when you 
> build your own?
>
>> and how many times it has been compromised. 
>
> [citation needed]
>
>> thanks for the suggestion but I'm very proud of what the creators of icecat 
>> have done.
>>
>
> according to you, all browsers and operating systems feed in to the 
> panopticon so what makes IceCat so special?

>>   
>
>
>--
http://gnuzilla.gnu.org

Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] I am really getting sick of this. Goodbye

[awakeyet]

I see what you're doing here, you're playing game of questions with me and 
being very evasive while pretending to have no idea what I am talking about, 
while also simultaneously giving yourself the unfounded excuse to back up your 
own flawed argument that "I'm wrong" for "no mentioned facts or reasons" 
without actually providing evidence that supports your claims against me even 
though I'm the one always pointing out the truth because I want people to wake 
up. 
How convenient that you never show my previous full reply in your messages to 
me so that people find it more difficult to follow this wild goose chase back 
and forth you are trying to play me with. I said it before and I'll say it 
again, if you don't like me for any reason, mark my emails as spam. I honestly 
do not enjoy our interactions and I politely request that you Julie, personally 
mark me as spam once and for all. But I know you wont, because that doesn't 
accomplish your goals does it? I'm not sorry and nobody is going to shut me up. 
I love helping people so please I kindly ask that you prove me wrong and don't 
message me again.

24. Mar 2017 09:01 by onp...@riseup.net:


> On 03/24/2017 07:09 AM, > awake...@tutanota.de>  wrote:
>> I point out your missteps in logic
>
> Where did you do this, and what "missteps in logic" are you talking about?
>
>> you suddenly shift your argument if I may call it that to the opposite of 
>> what you appeared to originally intend to say.
>
> What did you perceive me as originally intending to say, and what part
> of my message made you perceive that?
>
>> you don't actually want to provide a logical argument that shows any facts 
>> and reasons why what I said wasn't good enough for you.
>
> I didn't respond to your email to argue against it. I responded to your
> email to ask you to stop flooding my mailbox, as at the time you had
> sent eight emails in quick succession for no good reason.
>
> I did of course argue against what you were saying, but it's a very
> simple argument that you could easily refute if you are on the side of
> truth:
>
> 1. There is no evidence to support your hypothesis.
>
> 2. There is no reasonable motivation for any known party to do what you
> suggest.
>
> I can't prove that there isn't a conspiracy going on any more than you
> could prove that the tooth fairy isn't real. But you can either show
> evidence that supports your hypothesis, or at least start by showing a
> credible motivation someone could have to want to sabotage IceCat and
> not, say, Tor Browser.
>
>> I love it how everyone is mentioning TOR but they all fail to mention the 
>> important details like how extremely slow it is, the lack of functionality, 
>> and how many times it has been compromised. thanks for the suggestion but 
>> I'm very proud of what the creators of icecat have done.
>
> Matters of convenience like how fast the browser don't matter in this
> discussion, because if a malicious party wants to sabotage users'
> privacy, they will go for the more popular option no matter how
> convenient it is for the users, and given the lack of attention IceCat
> has gotten anywhere outside of our little circle and the boost in
> attention Tor Browser has gotten from the Snowden revelations, Tor
> Browser appears to be more popular. If you have any evidence to show
> that IceCat is actually more popular than Tor Browser, please feel free
> to present it.
>
> In what way is IceCat more secure than the Tor Browser Bundle? These are
> the facts I can see:
>
> 1. IceCat is frequently behind its upstream, Firefox, on updates.
>
> 2. IceCat includes LibreJS, which selectively stops scripts from
> executing based on the presence or absence of a license statement in a
> particular format. This means that any malicious party can convince
> IceCat to execute JavaScript simply by lying about the license, or
> (because the JavaScript infrastructure doesn't enable forking of a
> website's JavaScript code, and LibreJS doesn't even support blocking any
> scripts it detects as libre) simply making the script libre and keeping
> in the malicious functionality. I explained this in my essay,
> "Proprietary JavaScript: Fix, or Kill?"[1] Therefore, LibreJS cannot
> reliably be protective against any sort of malicious JavaScript code;
> its only protective effect is "security through obscurity".
>
> 3. When using Tor, IceCat blocks all requests for things like images,
> unlike Tor Browser. This makes it possible for any website to
> distinguish between Tor Browser and IceCat simply by embedding an image
> onto the Web page and seeing whether or not the image was sent at the
> time the Web page was loaded.
>
> 4. Other than LibreJS, which (as I explained) can easily be subverted,
> IceCat offers no protection against malicious scripts except for what is
> built into Firefox already. In particular, NoScript is not included.
> Even when it allows all scripts to execute, NoScript provides certain
> security features, such 

Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] I am really getting sick of this. Goodbye

[Gary]

asleepyet wrote:

> I love it how everyone is mentioning TOR

everyone = me

> but they all fail to mention the important details like how extremely slow it 
> is,

it has many layers -- like an onion.

> the lack of functionality,

it's just a network. what extra functionality are you hoping to add when you 
build your own?

> and how many times it has been compromised.

[citation needed]

> thanks for the suggestion but I'm very proud of what the creators of icecat 
> have done.

according to you, all browsers and operating systems feed in to the panopticon 
so what makes IceCat so special?
--
http://gnuzilla.gnu.org

Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] I am really getting sick of this. Goodbye

[Julie Marchant]

On 03/24/2017 07:09 AM, awake...@tutanota.de wrote:
> I point out your missteps in logic

Where did you do this, and what "missteps in logic" are you talking about?

> you suddenly shift your argument if I may call it that to the opposite of 
> what you appeared to originally intend to say.

What did you perceive me as originally intending to say, and what part
of my message made you perceive that?

> you don't actually want to provide a logical argument that shows any facts 
> and reasons why what I said wasn't good enough for you.

I didn't respond to your email to argue against it. I responded to your
email to ask you to stop flooding my mailbox, as at the time you had
sent eight emails in quick succession for no good reason.

I did of course argue against what you were saying, but it's a very
simple argument that you could easily refute if you are on the side of
truth:

1. There is no evidence to support your hypothesis.

2. There is no reasonable motivation for any known party to do what you
suggest.

I can't prove that there isn't a conspiracy going on any more than you
could prove that the tooth fairy isn't real. But you can either show
evidence that supports your hypothesis, or at least start by showing a
credible motivation someone could have to want to sabotage IceCat and
not, say, Tor Browser.

> I love it how everyone is mentioning TOR but they all fail to mention the 
> important details like how extremely slow it is, the lack of functionality, 
> and how many times it has been compromised. thanks for the suggestion but I'm 
> very proud of what the creators of icecat have done.

Matters of convenience like how fast the browser don't matter in this
discussion, because if a malicious party wants to sabotage users'
privacy, they will go for the more popular option no matter how
convenient it is for the users, and given the lack of attention IceCat
has gotten anywhere outside of our little circle and the boost in
attention Tor Browser has gotten from the Snowden revelations, Tor
Browser appears to be more popular. If you have any evidence to show
that IceCat is actually more popular than Tor Browser, please feel free
to present it.

In what way is IceCat more secure than the Tor Browser Bundle? These are
the facts I can see:

1. IceCat is frequently behind its upstream, Firefox, on updates.

2. IceCat includes LibreJS, which selectively stops scripts from
executing based on the presence or absence of a license statement in a
particular format. This means that any malicious party can convince
IceCat to execute JavaScript simply by lying about the license, or
(because the JavaScript infrastructure doesn't enable forking of a
website's JavaScript code, and LibreJS doesn't even support blocking any
scripts it detects as libre) simply making the script libre and keeping
in the malicious functionality. I explained this in my essay,
"Proprietary JavaScript: Fix, or Kill?"[1] Therefore, LibreJS cannot
reliably be protective against any sort of malicious JavaScript code;
its only protective effect is "security through obscurity".

3. When using Tor, IceCat blocks all requests for things like images,
unlike Tor Browser. This makes it possible for any website to
distinguish between Tor Browser and IceCat simply by embedding an image
onto the Web page and seeing whether or not the image was sent at the
time the Web page was loaded.

4. Other than LibreJS, which (as I explained) can easily be subverted,
IceCat offers no protection against malicious scripts except for what is
built into Firefox already. In particular, NoScript is not included.
Even when it allows all scripts to execute, NoScript provides certain
security features, such as protection against XSS attacks, which Tor
Browser benefits from.

5. IceCat and Tor Browser share the same upstream, Firefox ESR. This
means that, all other factors being equal, they should share the same
vulnerabilities. The least vulnerable of the two should be the one that
gets updated most promptly and most frequently, and that is Tor Browser.

Put together, all of these facts paint a picture that Tor Browser is not
only more private and more secure than IceCat, but substantially so. If
you have any evidence to the contrary, please show me what that evidence is.

[1] https://onpon4.github.io/other/kill-js/

-- 
Julie Marchant
https://onpon4.github.io

Protect your emails with GnuPG:
https://emailselfdefense.fsf.org



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
--
http://gnuzilla.gnu.org

Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] I am really getting sick of this. Goodbye

[awakeyet]

I keep trying to look but there's alot of trouble in the way. I personally 
consider it very unwise to put a smile on in this sort of moment and pretend 
everything is fine when there are clearly unresolved issues. turning away from 
the problem and allowing it to grow would be like ignoring the fact that IceCat 
isn't feeling good and could use a visit to the vet. poor thing.  I hope we can 
all sail out of this thunderstorm safely. peace.

20. Mar 2017 11:57 by ph.scha...@gmail.com:


> 
> Absolutely right. Everyone should calm down and look at the  common 
> greater good. Thank you for your appreciative words.
> 
> Oh, and to everyone who helped to develop Icecat and other open  source 
> software: THANK YOU, YOU PEOPLE ARE AWESOME.
> 
> 
>
> 
> 
> > Am 20.03.17 um 16:13 schrieb  > b...@shroggslodge.freeserve.co.uk> :
> > 
>>   >> >>   >> >>   >> 
>> >>   >> Until now I've resisted on commenting on this
>> little Icecat family fall-out between some of the
>> family members  :-)
>>   >>   
>>   >>   I can see some reason in all the 
>> points being made  from all parties - some perhaps more  
>> plausible/evidential/or whatever, than others.
>>   
>> >> For my two-penneth single point 
>> gut-feeling view (notjust for Icecat either), I would not 
>> expect to seecommunity contributed open-source  etc effort 
>> todevelop/build for platforms and so forth where 
>>commercial gain/interest is involved (usually for a
>> minority few too). I would expect it to be low onpriority if 
>> it was part of any work, unless there wassome mandated, 
>> agreed and valuable reason to.  Yes Iknow, sometimes it 
>> helps to do so, but I'm not sure inthis case.
>> 
>>   >> >> I really appreciate all the 
>> clever people who work on Linuxand open-source, community 
>> inspired and driven softwareefforts (and in other projects too) 
>> and make those availablefor use  - I'd be in a worse place 
>> without them and I cannotthank all those people enough...it 
>> warms the heart to seepeople coming together to achieve things 
>> in this manner.
>> 
>>   >>   Thank you.
>> >> Habs
>> >>   >> >>   
>> 
>> >>   >> 
>>   
>> >>   >> >>   
>> >> >>   >> >>   >>   
>> >> On 20 March 2017 at 02:22, Ian Dunn <>> du...@gnu.org>> > 
>>  wrote:
>>   
>>>
>>> I see what you're saying, awakeyet.  From a certain
>>> perspective, you make perfect sense.  Attempting to bog downthe 
>>> maintainer of a project like GNU IceCat to try and takeit down 
>>> is something I could see a competitor doing.  Iwon't argue that 
>>> there are rotten people that do pull shady,petty tactics like 
>>> that to get rid of the competition.
>>> 
>>> But there are also good people.  People like Daniel, that   
>>>  only wanted to see support for his OS.  He wants to use GNU
>>> IceCat, but he got attacked by people that laughed him outfor 
>>> not using GNU/Linux.  There could be 100 reasons hecan't or 
>>> won't switch, and we should respect that.  If wedon't show our 
>>> users respect, but instead assume thatperfectly honest people 
>>> are trying to troll or attack us,then we're going to lose 
>>> people.  Not everyone is out to getsomeone else, although I 
>>> know it can feel that waysometimes.
>>> 
>>> Everyone remember: We're all here because we want to see GNU
>>> IceCat succeed.  I've been watching the development for
>>> years.  I've seen two maintainers try and fail to keep upwith 
>>> Mozilla's development cycle, and now a third isstruggling to 
>>> keep up.  That's why it's up to us to besupportive, not just of 
>>> him, but of each other.
>>> 
>>> I know it's easy to label awakeyet as a conspiracy theorist 
>>>and move on without understanding his perspective, but we
>>> should all keep in mind that he might be right.  Andawakeyet, 
>>> you need to be willing to 

Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] I am really getting sick of this. Goodbye

[awakeyet]

I wholeheartedly agree with what you are saying but it isn't as simple as need 
and availability with users and icecat. 
we are like the rebels in starwars. giant corporations and their own search 
engines and browsers outnumber us and icecat like 20 deathstars to an xwing and 
a few people who pay tickets to ride the star destroyers still want this little 
xwing to help them so they can be a rebel on an enemy battleship because it 
gives them a false sense of security on a level of which I have never 
experience before. 
by giving into the fear of offending others and going down the path of 
political correctness and by dedicating resources that we don't even have for 
our own ship we risk everything. 

there is only one Icecat. 

there are no other good browsers out there with the privacy and functionality 
that Icecat does.

There could be 100 reasons a person who uses a closed source and totally 
"owned" corporate nightmare OS can't or won't switch, and we should respect 
that, but they undeniably have to respect the fact that we are in a 
technological survival situation. 

we are a desert nation and we only have so much water. if we give away water to 
anyone who threatens to feel "offended" we are endangering our very own 
survival in terms of the availability of IceCat to the thousands of users who 
use it properly on an open source free OS where it will actually do them any 
good at all, period.

If we show every random stranger who demands respect respect while completely 
assuming that they are perfectly honest people who would never try to troll, 
attack, or manipulate us, then we're not going to lose people. we're going to 
lose IceCat. 

If people want respect they deserve to earn it by using an operating system 
that doesn't take years of developer blood sweat and tears and flush it right 
down the toilet by compromising the very privacy and security that was lovingly 
constructed piece by piece into IceCat in the first place. 

I don't care who gets offended when I say this, and I'm not attacking anyone at 
all, I'm telling the truth: There is NO excuse for anyone to allow themselves 
to be so ignorant that they would lull themselves into a false sense of 
security by using a good browser on a bad Operating System. They Don't get to 
complain, and they don't get to be offended when they are absolutely factually 
doing things the Wrong Way. not after the developers work so very hard for 
years, and then these people demand that they work harder and give them 
whatever they want on another anti-security themed operating system. "devs just 
drink more coffee, stay up later I don't care"

I want people to be safe, and I want people to be intelligent. nothing makes me 
more sick and uncomfortable than watching people think and truly believe they 
are safe simply because they put a small bandage on a HUGE problem. the work 
required to make just one type of bandage is massive, and they want even more 
different bandages to satisfy their false peace of mind. it's inexcusable and I 
wont accept it. we can rainbow fish this all we want all day long, every day 
until we have nothing left for ourselves like a dry skeleton picked clean by 
vultures while throwing aside the very people who truly care about icecat.
you and I and everyone else here that's a part of this project and community 
know it as a fact that if IceCat didn't exist the very same people would be 
throwing temper tantrums and parasitizing off of another attractive web browser 
with a vulnerable dev team and community, the fruits of their hard work ripe 
for the picking.

"I'm not saying anyone's right or wrong here, but this argument is going to 
piss people off, and anger will only make it worse."

I'm not arguing. I'm stating facts and I'm going to keep blowing the fog away 
to keep the truth exposed as long as I live. If I or another person feels angry 
than I'm proud of that. I'm proud that for once we as human beings are able to 
feel the right emotion for the right reason, and able to have a healthy 
reaction to an unhealthy world without someone telling us we are not allowed to 
feel that way. it is our right to feel angry and I wish nothing but the best 
for all of us in that we use this anger and frustration constructively to do a 
strong good honest  job and ensuring the survival of IceCat. 

Unless we are interested in becoming like every other failed group or ideology 
throughout history that is flooded with people who are only interested in how 
it can benefit Only them, In a non-violent way, we must revolt against 
ignorance. "and get back to supporting the browser we all love."




19. Mar 2017 22:22 by du...@gnu.org:


>
> I see what you're saying, awakeyet.  From a certain perspective, you make 
> perfect sense.  Attempting to bog down the maintainer of a project like GNU 
> IceCat to try and take it down is something I could see a competitor doing.  
> I won't argue that there are rotten people that do pull shady, 

Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] I am really getting sick of this. Goodbye

[awakeyet]

I love it how everyone is mentioning TOR but they all fail to mention the 
important details like how extremely slow it is, the lack of functionality, and 
how many times it has been compromised. thanks for the suggestion but I'm very 
proud of what the creators of icecat have done.

19. Mar 2017 15:57 by gdri...@gmail.com:


> On Mar 19, 2017, at 11:34 AM, awakeyet wrote:
> > 
> > what browser may you suggest other security and privacy conscious users use 
> > in the place of IceCat
>
> there is a project that is even more privacy conscious...
>
> "Tor Browser lets you use Tor on Windows, Mac OS X, or Linux without needing 
> to install any software. It can run off a USB flash drive, comes with a 
> pre-configured web browser to protect your anonymity, and is self-contained 
> (portable)."
>
> "It prevents somebody watching your Internet connection from learning what 
> sites you visit, it prevents the sites you visit from learning your physical 
> location, and it lets you access sites which are blocked."
>
>--
http://gnuzilla.gnu.org

Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] I am really getting sick of this. Goodbye

[awakeyet]

So others are allowed to make points, but if I dare make a point that threatens 
their logic, and pops their percieved bubble of safety, I'm suddenly a "classic 
troll". 

I mention gamergate as well as other things because they are related. I doesn't 
take much effort to understand how truly connected everything is. I would 
apologize to you against my better judgement to make you feel better but I'm 
afraid I can not admit guilt where there is none. 

It's sad these days that everyone gets offended at everything, and nobody can 
handle the fact that there are people in the world who disagree with them. 
think a different way and you are instantly labeled a troll. reminds me of a 
few failed governments in history and how they treated their citizens to be 
honest. 

I'm onwards and upwards in defiance of political correctness and anything that 
wants to hold back the truth. I'm going to say what's right, without fear. have 
a nice day.


19. Mar 2017 15:17 by melik...@melikamp.com:


> On Sunday, March 19, 2017 19:34:28 > awake...@tutanota.de>  wrote:
>>> "Also, even the FSF supports building software for Windows." 
>> yes yes and linux has systemd. truly imperfect world we live in.
>
> awake...@tutanota.de> , julie is making a pertinent point: no one was arguing 
> with you in this forum for like 4 days now. You remark, on the other hand, is 
> a classic troll. Also your reference to gamergate. This list is, ostensibly, 
> for discussing issues with gnuzilla, such as bugs. A lot of the things you've 
> been saying in the last few days are completely, factually offtopic.--
http://gnuzilla.gnu.org

Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] I am really getting sick of this. Goodbye

[Philipp Schaefermeier]

Absolutely right. Everyone should calm down and look at the common 
greater good. Thank you for your appreciative words.


Oh, and to everyone who helped to develop Icecat and other open source 
software: THANK YOU, YOU PEOPLE ARE AWESOME.




Am 20.03.17 um 16:13 schrieb b...@shroggslodge.freeserve.co.uk:
Until now I've resisted on commenting on this little Icecat family 
fall-out between some of the family members  :-)


I can see some reason in all the points being made from all parties - 
some perhaps more plausible/evidential/or whatever, than others.


For my two-penneth single point gut-feeling view (not just for Icecat 
either), I would not expect to see community contributed open-source  
etc effort to develop/build for platforms and so forth where 
commercial gain/interest is involved (usually for a minority few too). 
I would expect it to be low on priority if it was part of any work, 
unless there was some mandated, agreed and valuable reason to.  Yes I 
know, sometimes it helps to do so, but I'm not sure in this case.


I really appreciate all the clever people who work on Linux and 
open-source, community inspired and driven software efforts (and in 
other projects too) and make those available for use  - I'd be in a 
worse place without them and I cannot thank all those people 
enough...it warms the heart to see people coming together to achieve 
things in this manner.


Thank you.
Habs





On 20 March 2017 at 02:22, Ian Dunn > wrote:



I see what you're saying, awakeyet.  From a certain perspective,
you make perfect sense.  Attempting to bog down the maintainer of
a project like GNU IceCat to try and take it down is something I
could see a competitor doing.  I won't argue that there are rotten
people that do pull shady, petty tactics like that to get rid of
the competition.

But there are also good people.  People like Daniel, that only
wanted to see support for his OS.  He wants to use GNU IceCat, but
he got attacked by people that laughed him out for not using
GNU/Linux.  There could be 100 reasons he can't or won't switch,
and we should respect that.  If we don't show our users respect,
but instead assume that perfectly honest people are trying to
troll or attack us, then we're going to lose people.  Not everyone
is out to get someone else, although I know it can feel that way
sometimes.

Everyone remember: We're all here because we want to see GNU
IceCat succeed.  I've been watching the development for years. 
I've seen two maintainers try and fail to keep up with Mozilla's
development cycle, and now a third is struggling to keep up. 
That's why it's up to us to be supportive, not just of him, but of

each other.

I know it's easy to label awakeyet as a conspiracy theorist and
move on without understanding his perspective, but we should all
keep in mind that he might be right.  And awakeyet, you need to be
willing to accept that you might be wrong.  I'm not saying
anyone's right or wrong here, but this argument is going to piss
people off, and anger will only make it worse.

GNU IceCat is struggling enough without us all squabbling amongst
each other.  Let's end this now before things get any worse, and
get back to supporting the browser we all love.

--
Ian Dunn

--
http://gnuzilla.gnu.org




--
http://gnuzilla.gnu.org


--
http://gnuzilla.gnu.org

Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] I am really getting sick of this. Goodbye

[Ian Dunn]

I see what you're saying, awakeyet.  From a certain perspective, you make 
perfect sense.  Attempting to bog down the maintainer of a project like GNU 
IceCat to try and take it down is something I could see a competitor doing.  I 
won't argue that there are rotten people that do pull shady, petty tactics like 
that to get rid of the competition.

But there are also good people.  People like Daniel, that only wanted to see 
support for his OS.  He wants to use GNU IceCat, but he got attacked by people 
that laughed him out for not using GNU/Linux.  There could be 100 reasons he 
can't or won't switch, and we should respect that.  If we don't show our users 
respect, but instead assume that perfectly honest people are trying to troll or 
attack us, then we're going to lose people.  Not everyone is out to get someone 
else, although I know it can feel that way sometimes.

Everyone remember: We're all here because we want to see GNU IceCat succeed.  
I've been watching the development for years.  I've seen two maintainers try 
and fail to keep up with Mozilla's development cycle, and now a third is 
struggling to keep up.  That's why it's up to us to be supportive, not just of 
him, but of each other.

I know it's easy to label awakeyet as a conspiracy theorist and move on without 
understanding his perspective, but we should all keep in mind that he might be 
right.  And awakeyet, you need to be willing to accept that you might be wrong. 
 I'm not saying anyone's right or wrong here, but this argument is going to 
piss people off, and anger will only make it worse.

GNU IceCat is struggling enough without us all squabbling amongst each other.  
Let's end this now before things get any worse, and get back to supporting the 
browser we all love.

--
Ian Dunn

--
http://gnuzilla.gnu.org

Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] I am really getting sick of this. Goodbye

[Narcis Garcia]

+1

El 19/03/17 a les 01:18, Julie Marchant ha escrit:
> Libre software is about freedom to control your computing, not freedom
> to choose a proprietary OS. The FSF supports compiling for Windows
> because it helps users to transition to libre software.
> 
> Attacking users for making a bad decision (Windows) is unproductive and
> hurtful, but not directly at odds with libre software principles as you
> suggest.
> 
> --
> Julie Marchant
> https://onpon4.github.io
> 


--
http://gnuzilla.gnu.org

Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] I am really getting sick of this. Goodbye

[Ivan Zaigralin]

On Sunday, March 19, 2017 19:34:28 awake...@tutanota.de wrote:
>> "Also, even the FSF supports building software for Windows." 
> yes yes and linux has systemd. truly imperfect world we live in.

awake...@tutanota.de, julie is making a pertinent point: no one was arguing 
with you in this forum for like 4 days now. You remark, on the other hand, is 
a classic troll. Also your reference to gamergate. This list is, ostensibly, 
for discussing issues with gnuzilla, such as bugs. A lot of the things you've 
been saying in the last few days are completely, factually offtopic.


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
--
http://gnuzilla.gnu.org

Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] I am really getting sick of this. Goodbye

[Julie Marchant]

Libre software is about freedom to control your computing, not freedom to 
choose a proprietary OS. The FSF supports compiling for Windows because it 
helps users to transition to libre software.

Attacking users for making a bad decision (Windows) is unproductive and 
hurtful, but not directly at odds with libre software principles as you suggest.

--
Julie Marchant
https://onpon4.github.io

On Mar 18, 2017 8:08 PM, The Canadian Bacon  wrote:
>
> It's​ funny, GNU is about freedom of choice, yet just about every message I 
> read has people trampling over others choice of operating system.
>
> It's appalling to read almost every day these arguments. Yes, sometimes it's 
> hard to support different platforms. I'm a software engineer myself, so I 
> know the complexities of supporting different systems, if the maintainer 
> doesn't want to support said platform I'm not going to argue, but if others 
> are going to bash people for their choices, it's basically like reading 
> poison. Just stop with it, it gets us no where and it goes against the very 
> principal of GNU.
>
> I'm at the point where I just want to unsubscribe to the mailing list, it's 
> that bad.
>
> On Mar 18, 2017 2:32 PM, "Julie Marchant"  wrote:
>>
>> On 03/18/2017 01:37 PM, awake...@tutanota.de wrote:
>> > I sense deep treachery however.
>>
>> What you "sense" is a conspiracy theory, and it's ridiculous. IceCat is
>> not important in the grand scheme of things for anyone who isn't a libre
>> software supporter, so there is no cause for a conspiracy. Further,
>> there is no evidence for a conspiracy. What you are seeing is nothing
>> more than user dissatisfaction. It's not just here, either; similar
>> dissatisfaction has been expressed on the Trisquel forum.
>>
>> Personally, I think it would be great if both of these projects could be
>> handed off to someone else. After all, Ruben is clearly overworked.
>> However, this is an imperfect world and there don't seem to be any takers.
>>
>> Also, even the FSF supports building software for Windows.
>>
>> Anyway, please stop flooding my inbox with screeching about your
>> conspiracy theories. That is not what I am subscribed to this mailing
>> list for.
>>
>> --
>> Julie Marchant
>> https://onpon4.github.io
>>
>> Protect your emails with GnuPG:
>> https://emailselfdefense.fsf.org
>>
>>
>> --
>> http://gnuzilla.gnu.org
>>
--
http://gnuzilla.gnu.org

Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] I am really getting sick of this. Goodbye

[The Canadian Bacon]

It's​ funny, GNU is about freedom of choice, yet just about every message I
read has people trampling over others choice of operating system.

It's appalling to read almost every day these arguments. Yes, sometimes
it's hard to support different platforms. I'm a software engineer myself,
so I know the complexities of supporting different systems, if the
maintainer doesn't want to support said platform I'm not going to argue,
but if others are going to bash people for their choices, it's basically
like reading poison. Just stop with it, it gets us no where and it goes
against the very principal of GNU.

I'm at the point where I just want to unsubscribe to the mailing list, it's
that bad.

On Mar 18, 2017 2:32 PM, "Julie Marchant"  wrote:

> On 03/18/2017 01:37 PM, awake...@tutanota.de wrote:
> > I sense deep treachery however.
>
> What you "sense" is a conspiracy theory, and it's ridiculous. IceCat is
> not important in the grand scheme of things for anyone who isn't a libre
> software supporter, so there is no cause for a conspiracy. Further,
> there is no evidence for a conspiracy. What you are seeing is nothing
> more than user dissatisfaction. It's not just here, either; similar
> dissatisfaction has been expressed on the Trisquel forum.
>
> Personally, I think it would be great if both of these projects could be
> handed off to someone else. After all, Ruben is clearly overworked.
> However, this is an imperfect world and there don't seem to be any takers.
>
> Also, even the FSF supports building software for Windows.
>
> Anyway, please stop flooding my inbox with screeching about your
> conspiracy theories. That is not what I am subscribed to this mailing
> list for.
>
> --
> Julie Marchant
> https://onpon4.github.io
>
> Protect your emails with GnuPG:
> https://emailselfdefense.fsf.org
>
>
> --
> http://gnuzilla.gnu.org
>
>
--
http://gnuzilla.gnu.org

Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] I am really getting sick of this. Goodbye

[awakeyet]

I will respect that, as I always have. I sense deep treachery however. I don't 
mean to personally attack but people need to be aware that something is 
definitely going on. my radar is ringing off the scale. the reply from "Daniel  
Quintiliani пишет:" reads word for word like a script from the SJW 
"social justice warrior" (sounds friendly, but is something different entirely) 
playbook. this is how "they" infiltrate communities and guilt trip everyone 
into slowly but surely feeling ashamed by who they are and what they do. they 
will use words like misogyny and racism as weapons, as tools of war to get us 
to doubt ourselves, even if we are nice people who would never do those things. 
the events that took place in gamergate are no joke. I will continue to try and 
watch out for icecat. God bless you all.

18. Mar 2017 13:31 by pub...@beloved.name:


> Don't violate the forum rules. We are not here to judge why people
> who use proprietary OS's, this forum is for IceCat only. Pleaserespect 
> that.
> 
> 
>> using  icecat on a closed source operating system is like eating burgers 
>>  and pizza and donuts 6 days a week and on the seventh day you eat  
>> one salad and think you are some health guru. you have to be  joking us, 
>> and you have to be joking yourself. seek professional  mental care help, 
>> and I really do mean that in the nicest and most  caring way possible. ( 
>> to the people who are suggesting these  things)
>>   
>>   16. Mar 2017 11:34 by >> pub...@beloved.name>> :
>>   
>>   
>>>  Please don't beoffensive in here.
>>> 
>>> I sympathize with Dan that the release schedules have lost
>>> control. But you are right too Sedovanr, there are only a few
>>> developers for IceCat, however, the team is about to expand.
>>> 
>>> >>> On 16 March 2017 15:32:35 CET, Sedov  Andrey <>>> 
>>> sedov...@yandex.ru>>> >  wrote:  
 
 You talk a lot. Talkabout the empty and unnecessary. The 
 number of Icecatdevelopers is small and they are right 
 that they do notspend their time on unnecessary things. 
 Want for auseless thing - support spyware OS Windows, DO!
 Develop your code for IceCat, and do not make claims and   
  whims for real developers Icecat.
 
  16.03.2017 09:39, Daniel  Quintiliani пишет:
  
>   > Hi,I am sick and effing tired of the project going 
> nowhere because all we do is argue over the same crap while the 
> developers can't make up their mind on what to do before the next 
> already-obsolete version is released. I've seen more fringe opinions with 
> IceCat than I've seen in any other software program. The truth is nobody 
> in IceCat cares about providing freedom to those in need of it, which 
> IceCat is in a crucial position for right now, they just like to argue 
> and troll and come up with nutty ideas, like that troll a few months ago 
> who said that closed-source OSes should receive no security updates for 
> any software at all, and now we got another weirdo who is putting out 
> similar rants. The GNU project is about providing freedom to people who 
> need it, not *deliberately* harming people's lives with insecure software 
> just because they use closed-source OSes. I switched to Pale Moon months 
> ago because, thanks to the trolls who hold back development, IceCat is 
> dangerous to use. I'm tired  of trolls. Have fun with your troll web 
> browser, I won't be recommending it to anyone anymore on any OS, closed 
> or open.---Dan Q--> http://gnuzilla.gnu.org> 
 
   
>>> >>> 
>>> -- 
>>> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my
>>> brevity.
>> 
> 
> --
http://gnuzilla.gnu.org

Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] I am really getting sick of this. Goodbye

[David Hedlund]

Don't violate the forum rules. We are not here to judge why people who 
use proprietary OS's, this forum is for IceCat only. Please respect that.


using icecat on a closed source operating system is like eating 
burgers and pizza and donuts 6 days a week and on the seventh day you 
eat one salad and think you are some health guru. you have to be 
joking us, and you have to be joking yourself. seek professional 
mental care help, and I really do mean that in the nicest and most 
caring way possible. ( to the people who are suggesting these things)


16. Mar 2017 11:34 by pub...@beloved.name :

Please don't be offensive in here.

I sympathize with Dan that the release schedules have lost
control. But you are right too Sedovanr, there are only a few
developers for IceCat, however, the team is about to expand.

On 16 March 2017 15:32:35 CET, Sedov Andrey > wrote:

You talk a lot. Talk about the empty and unnecessary. The
number of Icecat developers is small and they are right that
they do not spend their time on unnecessary things. Want for a
useless thing - support spyware OS Windows, DO!
Develop your code for IceCat, and do not make claims and whims
for real developers Icecat.


16.03.2017 09:39, Daniel Quintiliani пишет:

Hi,

I am sick and effing tired of the project going nowhere because all 
we do is argue over the same crap while the developers can't make up their mind 
on what to do before the next already-obsolete version is released. I've seen 
more fringe opinions with IceCat than I've seen in any other software program. 
The truth is nobody in IceCat cares about providing freedom to those in need of 
it, which IceCat is in a crucial position for right now, they just like to 
argue and troll and come up with nutty ideas, like that troll a few months ago 
who said that closed-source OSes should receive no security updates for any 
software at all, and now we got another weirdo who is putting out similar 
rants. The GNU project is about providing freedom to people who need it, not 
*deliberately* harming people's lives with insecure software just because they 
use closed-source OSes. I switched to Pale Moon months ago because, thanks to 
the trolls who hold back development, IceCat is dangerous to use. I'm tired of 
trolls. Have fun with your troll web browser, I won't be recommending it to 
anyone anymore on any OS, closed or open.

--

-Dan Q

--
http://gnuzilla.gnu.org



-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.




--
http://gnuzilla.gnu.org

Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] I am really getting sick of this. Goodbye

[David Hedlund]

Please don't be offensive in here.

I sympathize with Dan that the release schedules have lost control. But you are 
right too Sedovanr, there are only a few developers for IceCat, however, the 
team is about to expand.

On 16 March 2017 15:32:35 CET, Sedov Andrey  wrote:
>You talk a lot. Talk about the empty and unnecessary. The number of 
>Icecat developers is small and they are right that they do not spend 
>their time on unnecessary things. Want for a useless thing - support 
>spyware OS Windows, DO!
>Develop your code for IceCat, and do not make claims and whims for real
>
>developers Icecat.
>
>
>16.03.2017 09:39, Daniel Quintiliani пишет:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I am sick and effing tired of the project going nowhere because all
>we do is argue over the same crap while the developers can't make up
>their mind on what to do before the next already-obsolete version is
>released. I've seen more fringe opinions with IceCat than I've seen in
>any other software program. The truth is nobody in IceCat cares about
>providing freedom to those in need of it, which IceCat is in a crucial
>position for right now, they just like to argue and troll and come up
>with nutty ideas, like that troll a few months ago who said that
>closed-source OSes should receive no security updates for any software
>at all, and now we got another weirdo who is putting out similar rants.
>The GNU project is about providing freedom to people who need it, not
>*deliberately* harming people's lives with insecure software just
>because they use closed-source OSes. I switched to Pale Moon months ago
>because, thanks to the trolls who hold back development, IceCat is
>dangerous to use. I'm tired of trolls. Have fun with your troll web
>browser, I won't be recommending it to anyone anymore on any OS, closed
>or open.
>>
>> --
>>
>> -Dan Q
>>
>> --
>> http://gnuzilla.gnu.org

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.--
http://gnuzilla.gnu.org

Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] I am really getting sick of this. Goodbye

[Sedov Andrey]

You talk a lot. Talk about the empty and unnecessary. The number of 
Icecat developers is small and they are right that they do not spend 
their time on unnecessary things. Want for a useless thing - support 
spyware OS Windows, DO!
Develop your code for IceCat, and do not make claims and whims for real 
developers Icecat.



16.03.2017 09:39, Daniel Quintiliani пишет:

Hi,

I am sick and effing tired of the project going nowhere because all we do is 
argue over the same crap while the developers can't make up their mind on what 
to do before the next already-obsolete version is released. I've seen more 
fringe opinions with IceCat than I've seen in any other software program. The 
truth is nobody in IceCat cares about providing freedom to those in need of it, 
which IceCat is in a crucial position for right now, they just like to argue 
and troll and come up with nutty ideas, like that troll a few months ago who 
said that closed-source OSes should receive no security updates for any 
software at all, and now we got another weirdo who is putting out similar 
rants. The GNU project is about providing freedom to people who need it, not 
*deliberately* harming people's lives with insecure software just because they 
use closed-source OSes. I switched to Pale Moon months ago because, thanks to 
the trolls who hold back development, IceCat is dangerous to use. I'm tired of 
trolls. Have fun with your troll web browser, I won't be recommending it to 
anyone anymore on any OS, closed or open.

--

-Dan Q

--
http://gnuzilla.gnu.org


--
http://gnuzilla.gnu.org

Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] I am really getting sick of this. Goodbye

[Ivan Zaigralin]

And I am getting more and more satisfied with icecat. I have critiqued the 
release schedule in the past, but I came to understand that developers need to 
strike a balance between upstream updates and downstream fixes, which are 
often just as important. And since I don't understand any of the technical 
issues facing them, I could as well shut up.

> The GNU project is about providing freedom to
> people who need it, not *deliberately* harming people's lives with insecure
> software just because they use closed-source OSes.

Lacking resources is what is happening, and you just called it "*deliberately* 
harming people's lives". Please consider contributing a binary window$ build 
or a build instruction manual, I am sure the project will accept them. I do 
believe icecat would be better than firefox on any os, and I suspect 
developers would agree. But I would also argue that the edge gained with 
icecat on window$ simply does not warrant an effort to provide it. I am afraid  
that it could also create a false sense of privacy, while no such thing exists 
in the window$ world.

Not worth developing, don't you agree, Daniel? It sounds like you, for one, 
have absolutely no time to contribute, so may be that's all that's happening. 
With more resources, I am sure it would still be provided.


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
--
http://gnuzilla.gnu.org