ma, 2006-01-30 kello 13:39 +1100, Craig Sanders kirjoitti:
i'll behave as i please.
if you don't like my words, then don't read them - kill file me if you
feel it's necessary.
Nobody has the right to be personally insulting on Debian lists. It
would certainly be possible to express concern
Craig Sanders wrote:
as has been pointed out hundreds of times before, there are several
other situations where neither the DFSG nor the debian project require
modifiability - license texts and copyright notices, for example.
As has been pointed out hundreds more times, those limitations are
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Craig Sanders [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sun, Jan 29, 2006 at 05:13:26PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
On Mon, Jan 30, 2006 at 12:09:55AM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
On Mon, Jan 23, 2006 at 02:29:38AM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
On Mon,
On Mon, Jan 30, 2006 at 09:24:15AM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
GIVE. IT. A. FUCKING. REST!
Craig,
I'm willing to debate whatever you want to debate about the GFDL, but
not with insults and shouting.
Respectfully,
--
.../ -/ ---/ .--./ / .--/ .-/ .../ -/ ../ -./ --./ / -.--/ ---/ ..-/ .-./ /
On Mon, Jan 30, 2006 at 01:08:36PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
On Mon, Jan 30, 2006 at 09:24:15AM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
GIVE. IT. A. FUCKING. REST!
Craig,
I'm willing to debate whatever you want to debate about the GFDL, but
not with insults and shouting.
no, the truth is,
On Mon, Jan 30, 2006 at 10:24:17AM +, MJ Ray wrote:
Craig Sanders wrote:
as has been pointed out hundreds of times before, there are several
other situations where neither the DFSG nor the debian project require
modifiability - license texts and copyright notices, for example.
As has
Craig Sanders [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, Jan 30, 2006 at 10:24:17AM +, MJ Ray wrote:
As has been pointed out hundreds more times, those limitations are
imposed by copyright law more than by licences. Even the licences
which can be modified (such as the GPL), can't be modified if you
On Tue, Jan 31, 2006 at 01:34:45AM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
On Mon, Jan 30, 2006 at 01:08:36PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
On Mon, Jan 30, 2006 at 09:24:15AM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
GIVE. IT. A. FUCKING. REST!
Craig,
I'm willing to debate whatever you want to debate about
On Mon, Jan 30, 2006 at 03:09:53PM +, MJ Ray wrote:
you CAN modify an invariant section - but you can only do so
by adding a new section that subverts or refutes or simply adds
to the invariant section. (Craig Sanders, January 2005)
vs
If it is modified, it does not do its job.
Lars Wirzenius [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Craig, could you please behave in a polite manner? Regardless of whether
you're right or wrong about your claims about the GFDL, your manner is
inappropriate on Debian mailing lists.
Craig has already made it abundantly clear that he thinks the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Thomas Bushnell BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Lars Wirzenius [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Craig, could you please behave in a polite manner? Regardless of whether
you're right or wrong about your claims about the GFDL, your manner is
inappropriate
Roger Leigh [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think that this behaviour, as well as that on other lists in the
recent past, is making it increasingly necessary that we introduce
some way of enforcing a minimum standard of decency on our lists. We
can't continue like this for long. This sort of
On Mon, Jan 30, 2006 at 01:47:02PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
but neither of those is grounds for imposing a 3:1
supermajority requirement.
The problem with this view is that it effectively would nullify the
3:1 requirement if applied in some other cases.
Not necessarily.
Anton Zinoviev [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, Jan 30, 2006 at 01:47:02PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
but neither of those is grounds for imposing a 3:1
supermajority requirement.
The problem with this view is that it effectively would nullify the
3:1 requirement if applied
On Mon, Jan 30, 2006 at 04:12:09PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
On Tue, Jan 31, 2006 at 01:34:45AM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
On Mon, Jan 30, 2006 at 01:08:36PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
I'm willing to debate whatever you want to debate about the GFDL, but
not with insults and
Roger Leigh
I think that this behaviour, as well as that on other lists in the
recent past, is making it increasingly necessary that we introduce
some way of enforcing a minimum standard of decency on our lists. [...]
You pillory[1] a man over his -private beliefs about death[2]
to the point
MJ Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Nevertheless, Craig Sanders's colourful rants break the lists code
of conduct far more clearly than posting satire to -devel-announce.
Where are the winged angels of vengence? But then, the d-d-a ban
didn't look like it was about enforcing the list codes
* MJ Ray [Tue, 31 Jan 2006 00:25:48 +]:
to the point where he recoils from the project[3], don't answer
Are you deliberately lying here, to make your point prettier, or are
you ciberately stating that Andrew lied himself in [3]?
3.
Craig Sanders [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
with one of you, as with all, there's no point in engaging in debate or
any kind of civilised discourse.
So ... Why don't you just stop the flaming, if there's no point anyway?
I have the feeling that this would somehow improve the climate of the
On Tue, Jan 31, 2006 at 10:10:11AM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
On Mon, Jan 30, 2006 at 04:12:09PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
On Tue, Jan 31, 2006 at 01:34:45AM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
On Mon, Jan 30, 2006 at 01:08:36PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
I'm willing to debate whatever
On Mon, Jan 30, 2006 at 06:13:14PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
no, the truth is, you're blinkered and inflexible and determined to
twist [...]
oh look, it's yet another wind up doll - how cute.
how long did it take to train you? can you do other tricks?
there does seem to be a lot of
Hi folks,
A new amendment has made it in to the GR _after_ the two week
discussion deadline. If there are other people mulling proposals for
amendments to the GR, now is the time -- if submissions keep coming
in at two week intervals, voting on this GR can be delayed almost
On Wed, Jan 25, 2006 at 09:54:40AM +0100, Frank K?ster wrote:
Anton Zinoviev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Let the sheet instead be a coffee cup; in Germany Lehmann's sell
cups with Emacs or vi commands on them. You can't add a second cup
for the invariant sections, even if they fit on it,
23 matches
Mail list logo
