On 11/4/19 12:49 AM, Alexandre François Garreau wrote:
> Le lundi 4 novembre 2019 06:46:36 CET, vous avez écrit :
>> On 11/4/19 12:45 AM, Alexandre François Garreau wrote:
>>> Le lundi 4 novembre 2019 06:41:29 CET, vous avez écrit :
On 11/4/19 12:30 AM, Alexandre François Garreau
Le lundi 4 novembre 2019 06:46:36 CET, vous avez écrit :
> On 11/4/19 12:45 AM, Alexandre François Garreau wrote:
> > Le lundi 4 novembre 2019 06:41:29 CET, vous avez écrit :
> >> On 11/4/19 12:30 AM, Alexandre François Garreau wrote:
> >>> I don’t like the term “bigotâ€Â. It
On 11/4/19 12:45 AM, Alexandre François Garreau wrote:
> Le lundi 4 novembre 2019 06:41:29 CET, vous avez écrit :
>> On 11/4/19 12:30 AM, Alexandre François Garreau wrote:
>>> I don’t like the term “bigotâ€Â. It seems mainly used
>>> against
>>> individual, for individual
On 11/4/19 12:45 AM, Alexandre François Garreau wrote:
> Le lundi 4 novembre 2019 06:41:29 CET, vous avez écrit :
>> On 11/4/19 12:30 AM, Alexandre François Garreau wrote:
>>> I don’t like the term “bigotâ€Â. It seems mainly used
>>> against
>>> individual, for individual
Le lundi 4 novembre 2019 06:41:29 CET, vous avez écrit :
> On 11/4/19 12:30 AM, Alexandre François Garreau wrote:
> > I don’t like the term “bigotâ€. It seems mainly used against
> > individual, for individual purposes. Not a very social term.
>
> It is the cornerstone of Jewish ethics.
On 11/4/19 12:30 AM, Alexandre François Garreau wrote:
> I don’t like the term “bigotâ€. It seems mainly used against
> individual, for
> individual purposes. Not a very social term.
It is the cornerstone of Jewish ethics.
--
So many immigrant groups have swept through our town
that
Le lundi 4 novembre 2019, 05:51:07 CET Mike Gerwitz a écrit :
> Ruben:
>
> On Sun, Nov 03, 2019 at 22:32:04 -0500, Ruben Safir wrote:
> > Nobody believes this except for a few hysterical lunitics. Your
> > posting this as such is another form of disinformation and an attack on
> > the
Le lundi 4 novembre 2019 05:40:11 CET, vous avez écrit :
> On Mon, Nov 04, 2019 at 05:25:52AM +0100, Alexandre François Garreau wrote:
> > Hi, I like discussion. This so because I like language. And therefore,
> > meaning.
>
> Try the term Loshen HaRah
>
> it is Hebrew
Found it. Interesting.
On Sun, Nov 03, 2019 at 23:59:02 -0500, Ruben Safir wrote:
> I don't care what your moderation is. I will just copy to places that
> don't moderate
[...]
My intent is not to censor you. I would prefer that you be able to
communicate your thoughts openly. I'm trying to help ensure that you
can
Le lundi 4 novembre 2019 05:50:09 CET, vous avez écrit :
> 1 : of, relating to, or marked by hysteria hysterical conditions
> 2 : feeling or showing extreme and unrestrained emotion hysterical fans
> … the paper did not hesitate to appeal to racial passions in hysterical
> headlines and rabid
On 11/3/19 11:51 PM, Mike Gerwitz wrote:
> This is unkind and unconstructive.
No it is not. It is SPOT ON and constructive.
Lieing about Richard Stallman, that is unkind and fucked up.
I don't care what your moderation is. I will just copy to places that
don't moderate this truly fucked up
On 11/3/19 11:38 PM, Alexandre François Garreau wrote:
> The question is then: what does it mean? crazy? or simply you don’t like
> the
> person? or nothing?
It means that your working from an emotional framework where one acts
irrationally... to the point by losing the ability to reason.
On 11/3/19 11:38 PM, Alexandre François Garreau wrote:
> Yet, if we take a scientific approach to language,
Not interested. I used the right word in the right place for the right
meaning. I make plenty of gramatical errors, and this is not one.
--
So many immigrant groups have swept through
On 11/3/19 11:34 PM, Ruben Safir wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 04, 2019 at 05:25:52AM +0100, Alexandre François Garreau wrote:
>> Hi, I like discussion. This so because I like language. And therefore,
>> meaning.
>>
>> Le lundi 4 novembre 2019, 04:32:04 CET Ruben Safir a écrit :
>>> Nobody believes
Ruben:
On Sun, Nov 03, 2019 at 22:32:04 -0500, Ruben Safir wrote:
> Nobody believes this except for a few hysterical lunitics. Your
> posting this as such is another form of disinformation and an attack on
> the intelligence of the GNU community.
[...]
> I'm telling you what most of us who are
In light of the changing shape of the list's moderation,
the following is a re-post of a message that was previously
rejected as being flamey or whatever.
Well, is it?
There is no hot temper behind it; I had it in draft form
overnight, mulled over and reworded some things the next day.
If
On Mon, Nov 04, 2019 at 05:25:52AM +0100, Alexandre François Garreau wrote:
> Hi, I like discussion. This so because I like language. And therefore,
> meaning.
>
Try the term Loshen HaRah
it is Hebrew
>
> But now about “hysterical”, which has been hinted several times by several
> people
Le lundi 4 novembre 2019 05:34:26 CET, vous avez écrit :
> On Mon, Nov 04, 2019 at 05:25:52AM +0100, Alexandre François Garreau wrote:
> > But now about “hysterical”,
> French I have no idea about.
I think it’s the same in both.
> Regardless how many times it is said otherwise, it doesn't
On Mon, Nov 04, 2019 at 05:25:52AM +0100, Alexandre François Garreau wrote:
> Hi, I like discussion. This so because I like language. And therefore,
> meaning.
>
> Le lundi 4 novembre 2019, 04:32:04 CET Ruben Safir a écrit :
> > Nobody believes this except for a few hysterical lunitics.
>
> I
Hi, I like discussion. This so because I like language. And therefore,
meaning.
Le lundi 4 novembre 2019, 04:32:04 CET Ruben Safir a écrit :
> Nobody believes this except for a few hysterical lunitics.
I think you’re wrong about lunatism. I think though mob attacks can seem
really lunatic,
Le dimanche 3 novembre 2019, 22:34:04 CET Ludovic Courtès a écrit :
> Hi Brandon,
>
> Brandon Invergo skribis:
> > For the past month or so, every message to the list has been subject to
> > moderation, so-called "emergency moderation". It has become clear that
> > the moderation was being used
On 11/3/19 10:42 PM, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 3, 2019 at 10:32 PM Ruben Safir wrote:
>> Nobody believes this except for a few hysterical lunitics. Your
>> posting this as such is another form of disinformation and an attack on
>> the intelligence of the GNU community.
>
> This is
On 11/3/19 10:42 PM, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 3, 2019 at 10:32 PM Ruben Safir wrote:
>> Nobody believes this except for a few hysterical lunitics. Your
>> posting this as such is another form of disinformation and an attack on
>> the intelligence of the GNU community.
>
> This is
On 11/3/19 10:42 PM, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 3, 2019 at 10:32 PM Ruben Safir wrote:
>> Nobody believes this except for a few hysterical lunitics. Your
>> posting this as such is another form of disinformation and an attack on
>> the intelligence of the GNU community.
>
> This is
On 11/3/19 10:42 PM, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 3, 2019 at 10:32 PM Ruben Safir wrote:
>> Nobody believes this except for a few hysterical lunitics. Your
>> posting this as such is another form of disinformation and an attack on
>> the intelligence of the GNU community.
>
> This is
On 11/3/19 10:42 PM, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 3, 2019 at 10:32 PM Ruben Safir wrote:
>> Nobody believes this except for a few hysterical lunitics. Your
>> posting this as such is another form of disinformation and an attack on
>> the intelligence of the GNU community.
> This is
On Sat, Nov 02, 2019 at 02:14:55PM +0100, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> Hi Sandra,
>
> On Fri, 2019-11-01 at 09:34 -0600, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
> > I'd like to clarify some things, and provide some references. Since I
> > sent my original post in this thread, several people have accused me of
> >
On Sun, Nov 3, 2019 at 10:32 PM Ruben Safir wrote:
> Nobody believes this except for a few hysterical lunitics. Your
> posting this as such is another form of disinformation and an attack on
> the intelligence of the GNU community.
This is unkind and doesn't contribute to a constructive
On Sat, Nov 02, 2019 at 02:14:55PM +0100, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> Hi Sandra,
>
> On Fri, 2019-11-01 at 09:34 -0600, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
> > I'd like to clarify some things, and provide some references. Since I
> > sent my original post in this thread, several people have accused me of
> >
>
> We should clarify the misrepresentations now, correct the misinformation
> and publicize facts instead of turmoil, however cathartic that turmoil
> may seem to some with a need to express visions of future GNU and
> volunteer structures.
>
> I truly believe that history will apologize to
Hi Brandon,
Brandon Invergo skribis:
> For the past month or so, every message to the list has been subject to
> moderation, so-called "emergency moderation". It has become clear that
> the moderation was being used in a biased manner. We have decided to
> remove Mark and Carlos as
Hi,
On Sun, 2019-11-03 at 14:29 -0500, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> Thanks to all of those that provided input into the list moderation
> and censorship discussions.
>
> My moderation is certainly biased towards posters that write well, and
> argue without attacking the original poster, and create
On Sun, Nov 3, 2019 at 4:02 PM Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
> No, or minimal moderation -- as has always been the case for GNU
> lists. It is better to let a off-topic message through, and
> communicate to the user of the case than to reject it. It is better
> to ask the person to use a kinder tone
On Sun, Nov 3, 2019 at 12:41 PM Brandon Invergo wrote:
> For the past month or so, every message to the list has been subject to
> moderation, so-called "emergency moderation". It has become clear that
> the moderation was being used in a biased manner. We have decided to
> remove Mark and
> > All of those messages were censored in a biased impartial way, as they
> > allowed other side to talk, but not the opposition.
>
> Please actually count how many mails actually got to the list for each
> person.
Right. There are just ~3 people who write more messages to the
My opinion on that:
* Ludovic Courtès [2019-11-03 17:37]:
> To what extent is the success of GNU, a project with thousands of
> volunteers, due to the dedication of a single person?
You imply with "single person" to be Dr. Richard Stallman.
It is evident that many people participated and
Hi everyone,
For the past month or so, every message to the list has been subject to
moderation, so-called "emergency moderation". It has become clear that
the moderation was being used in a biased manner. We have decided to
remove Mark and Carlos as moderators/admins and to turn off the
Le samedi 2 novembre 2019, 10:57:54 CET Alfred M. Szmidt a écrit :
> But that is the thing -- GNU maintainers don't agree to anything other
> than technical aspects. The GNU project isn't about founding a
> community, it is about creating a free operating system.
That is even more important that
Le samedi 2 novembre 2019, 14:43:45 CET Jan Nieuwenhuizen a écrit :
> Alfred M. Szmidt writes:
> > But that is the thing -- GNU maintainers don't agree to anything
>
> Could you please make it more clear in your messages when you speak for
> yourself, i.e.: "I don't agree to ..." and refrain from
* Mark Wielaard [2019-11-02 17:04]:
> Thanks for saying so clearly what I believe many of us feel.
Comments on Internet clearly show that only minority of those who you
generalize as "many of us" believe that. By using generalization you
are inflating the number of people. It is simply
On 11/2/19 7:54 PM, DJ Delorie wrote:
> If your solution to "I broke the rules" is "post my messages anyway, so
> I can get away with breaking the rules"... no thanks.
fuck the rules
--
So many immigrant groups have swept through our town
that Brooklyn, like Atlantis, reaches mythological
I have been censored too, just to stop thread continuing I think. If I was
unkind or too prolific (that sometimes happen) I’d like being told so. I could
also apologize and explain then, and I hope a corrected error, among other
uncorrected errors, could have on mind a better overall effect
Le samedi 2 novembre 2019, 20:01:24 CET Carlos O'Donell a écrit :
> I don't see why I should not be a moderator. Everyone has some kind of
> bias. Moderation is a difficult task.
To begin with, indeed everybody is to be biased, in the end… but what kind of
bias? Someone not having signed might
Le samedi 2 novembre 2019, 01:28:32 CET Samuel Thibault a écrit :
> Alexandre François Garreau, le ven. 01 nov. 2019 19:23:40 +0100, a ecrit:
> > Would be better if, like other mailing-list softwares I saw, we could
> > be resent back the previous mail by asking the mailing-list software
>
> Even
Hi Jason,
Jason Self skribis:
> This has been one benefit to the GNU Project having the BDFL model, as
> some other projects also have. There's been one person to keep the GNU
> Project on point with regard to these social, ethical, political, and
> moral issues rather than having them get
Hi Andy,
Andy Wingo skribis:
> The realm of ideas pertains to the FSF: theory, organization, advocacy,
> and so on.
>
> GNU, on the other hand, is about action in the software domain: the
> construction of an ever-growing software commons, putting the theory of
> the FSF into practice, and
Mark, those are just generalizations, if you wish to minimize flames,
minimize it from your stand point without inflating accusations.
Real moderation is public, it is not censorship. Censorship does not
allow people to see information. That is what you do. In same cases of
profanity I would
Dear Carlos,
* Carlos O'Donell [2019-11-02 20:07]:
> On Sat, Nov 2, 2019 at 2:01 PM Dora Scilipoti wrote:
> > You, Carlos O'Donell, and your fellow censor Mark Wielaard, should NOT
> > be the moderators of this list. You are both signers of a public
> > document that calls for the removal of
* Mark Wielaard [2019-11-03 14:58]:
> On Sun, 2019-11-03 at 11:52 +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > Jean Louis, le dim. 03 nov. 2019 11:02:38 +0100, a ecrit:
> > > All of those messages were censored in a biased impartial way, as they
> > > allowed other side to talk, but not the opposition.
> >
Hi DJ,
On Sat, 2019-11-02 at 19:54 -0400, DJ Delorie wrote:
> If your solution to "I broke the rules" is "post my messages anyway, so
> I can get away with breaking the rules"... no thanks.
>
> If you have a problem with the moderation, that's between you and the
> moderators. The rest of us
Jean Louis, le dim. 03 nov. 2019 11:02:38 +0100, a ecrit:
> All of those messages were censored in a biased impartial way, as they
> allowed other side to talk, but not the opposition.
Please actually count how many mails actually got to the list for each
person.
Samuel
* Marcel [2019-11-02 22:11]: > On 11/3/19 2:01 AM,
Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> > I have indicated to Marcel that if he wishes to repost messages
> > for review that the moderators (4 of us) are willing to review it
> > again.
>
> You censored twelve of my messages.
And 27 of mine.
12 you, 27 of
* Brian Tiffin:
> To ensure a future GNU, there are activities required to ensure present
> GNU. Time sensitive and critical events are in progress. I vote no on
> prioritizing this discussion at a time when there is an active campaign
> that can be seen as an attempt to weaken free software
Marcel writes:
> I invite you to post _ALL_ my censored messages in chronological order,
If your solution to "I broke the rules" is "post my messages anyway, so
I can get away with breaking the rules"... no thanks.
If you have a problem with the moderation, that's between you and the
> But that is the thing -- GNU maintainers don't agree to anything
Could you please make it more clear in your messages when you speak for
yourself, i.e.: "I don't agree to ..." and refrain from suggesting that
you could be speaking for me?
It wasn't my opinion, it is what you agree
55 matches
Mail list logo
