Hi,
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 2:26 AM, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
>> GNOME, both as a community and as a foundation, should teach the good
>> examples and critic the bad ones.
>
> GNOME should stick to teaching the good examples. Criticizing the bad
> ones is only counter productive.
Just curious, s
Hi!
> Respect is earned, not due. You haven't behaved in a way that deserves
> my respect.
Both of you: The Code of Conduct is in affect for the mailing lists, so
stick to it. That's even more important when you discuss about a Code
for the Planet...
Regards,
Johannes
signature.asc
Descriptio
Em 14-12-2009 00:26, Philip Van Hoof escreveu:
On Sun, 2009-12-13 at 13:34 +, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
Em 13-12-2009 12:44, Philip Van Hoof escreveu:
Richard's claim that proprietary is illegitimate is enforcement. He's
making a philosophic mistake that contradicts his own ideology
On Sun, 2009-12-13 at 13:34 +, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
> Em 13-12-2009 12:44, Philip Van Hoof escreveu:
> > Richard's claim that proprietary is illegitimate is enforcement. He's
> > making a philosophic mistake that contradicts his own ideology of free
> > choice.
>
> Choice of the mas
On 12/13/09 8:49 AM, "Ciaran O'Riordan" wrote:
>
> Yes. You said that no one's yet demonstrated a problem, and you gave a
> solution for if the problem was demonstrated. You're solution was 100%
> compatible with Richard's solution.
Except that we now seem to have had the (non-existent) proble
Yes. You said that no one's yet demonstrated a problem, and you gave a
solution for if the problem was demonstrated. You're solution was 100%
compatible with Richard's solution.
This means that the only difference between the two positions is the number
of problematic posts. For you it's curre
On 12/13/09 7:24 AM, "Ciaran O'Riordan" wrote:
>
> That's a rule (a policy), which is mild and doesn't involve jumping straight
> to blocking a whole blog. And it was suggested in heated opposition to this
> comment:
No, Ciaran: you've removed the entire surrounding context, and recast the
sense
Putting aside, for a minute, the interpretations, elaborations and
rewordings, it's funny how similar the actual suggestions are:
Lefty says:
> if any instances of
> "promotion of non-free software" should actually occur, they can be dealt
> with when they do, on a case-by-case basis.
That's a r
Em 13-12-2009 12:44, Philip Van Hoof escreveu:
Richard's claim that proprietary is illegitimate is enforcement. He's
making a philosophic mistake that contradicts his own ideology of free
choice.
Choice of the master is not free choice for a slave. It only looks like
"free choice" to other mas
On Sat, 2009-12-12 at 15:49 -0600, Brian Cameron wrote:
Note that I've been cutting a bit in the "> reply" text.
> Richard is free to suggest what he thinks should be done, as are we
> all. The GNOME Foundation is free to resolve this problem in the way
> that we think makes the most sense, after
On 12/12/09 1:49 PM, "Brian Cameron" wrote:
>
> However, since this problem seems to really happen only on rare
> occasion, and since it does not seem that any non-free organizations
> are really trying to use GNOME Planet to do any real advertising,
> then perhaps a disclaimer link to highlight
Em 12-12-2009 11:31, Philip Van Hoof escreveu:
On Sat, 2009-12-12 at 09:51 +, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
I have a personal blog and when I asked planet.openmoko.org to add my
posts, I gave them the RSS feed corresponding to posts under the tag
OpenMoko.
Perhaps it would be a simpler sug
Philip:
On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 12:20:50 -0600 Brian Cameron wrote:
Richard's suggestion that a "mild approach" may be appropriate does
not seem over-the-top to me. Perhaps a "mild approach" could be
something simple like a disclaimer on planet...
I don't think Richard is suggesting that as "m
Hi!
> I have a personal blog and when I asked planet.openmoko.org to add my
> posts, I gave them the RSS feed corresponding to posts under the tag
> OpenMoko.
>
> Perhaps it would be a simpler suggestion to pass on the aggregated
> bloggers that after date X only posts with the tag GNOME will
(I'm replying the two of you at the same time in an attempt at reducing
the thread's size)
On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 12:20:50 -0600 Brian Cameron wrote:
> Richard's suggestion that a "mild approach" may be appropriate does
> not seem over-the-top to me. Perhaps a "mild approach" could be
> something s
Em 11-12-2009 18:20, Brian Cameron escreveu:
If there is enough people to do a vote, that's great.
My vote: -1
I do not think that people should be discouraged from suggesting rules
for the GNOME community, and a reaction like leaving the GNU community
because Richard made a suggestion could b
If there is enough people to do a vote, that's great.
My vote: -1
I do not think that people should be discouraged from suggesting rules
for the GNOME community, and a reaction like leaving the GNU community
because Richard made a suggestion could be interpreted that way, I
think. We can alway
17 matches
Mail list logo
