Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.project > #13126

Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm?

Show all headers | View raw

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] - view raw

At 2022-12-17T19:02:11-0000, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> I have been around long enough to remember when in 2004 a very
> prominent developer of Chinese origins

...but in Australia at the time and, I have heard, residing there still.

> hurriedly left the project when the d-i (?) team refused to mention
> Taiwan in the way he preferred.

Yes.  It needed to be "Taiwan, Province of China".

Since then it's possible we'd have had to change it to "Chinese
Taipei".[1]

As I said in that same conversation, he was a capable guy.  I'm sorry we
lost him.  But it was right for us not to pay the price he demanded.

> So, there is not much that we have not already seen...

I'd like to quote a friend of mine who fights a lot of these battles.

--snip--
Another thing I find objectionable: exhibitionist etymological
offense-taking. I have never met a South Asian person offended by the
word "thug." But I have listened to white people show off their
knowledge of etymology and history by being offended on South Asian
people's behalf and white people being offended on behalf of Alaskan
natives over the use of the word "Eskimo." Actually, not only have I
listened to them: I HAVE BEEN THEM.

If you want to be offended on someone's behalf, you might want to
inquire about what actually offends them. It may surprise you.

But of course, this gets to the root of offense-taking. The taking of
proxy offense is a social strategy used by people when they feel their
social status is threatened.

The same impulse that made baroque South Carolina planters beat black
men in the street for looking at "their" women in the wrong way is what
powers indirect offense-taking. It makes it appear that you are
controlling social boundaries and have the power to defend your
inferiors from harm.
--snip--

White-knighting can be, and often is, another form of tech-bro alpha
dogging.  We would do well to recall the restrictive gender roles and
patriarchal hegemony prescribed by the rules of feudal chivalry.  (I
don't think it's any accident that some of these same nobility ended up
owning plantations and establishing military schools in the U.S. South.)

> I am late to this thread, so I will just say that:
> - I appreciate a lot of what Branden and Sam wrote here

Thank you!  I remember getting into a lot of arguments with you back in
the day.  I can't remember what any of them was about.  🤣

> - the outcome is sad

Did you see the part where I ITA-ed fortune-mod?

No one has yet responded my invitation to be a technical consultant to
save my geriatric packaging skills from embarrassment.  This may be
because people are easily fatigued of reading my emails.  There are
darker possibilities.

I'll muddle through on my own if I need to.

But, first, groff.

Regards,
Branden

[1] https://www.euronews.com/2021/07/26/what-is-chinese-taipei

Back to linux.debian.project | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? "Andrew M.A. Cater" <amacater@einval.com> - 2022-11-19 16:10 +0100
  Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Scott Kitterman <debian@kitterman.com> - 2022-11-19 17:40 +0100
  Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Dominik George <natureshadow@debian.org> - 2022-11-19 17:40 +0100
    Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Roberto C. Sánchez <roberto@debian.org> - 2022-11-19 21:50 +0100
      Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? "Andrew M.A. Cater" <amacater@einval.com> - 2022-11-19 22:10 +0100
      Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Dominik George <natureshadow@debian.org> - 2022-11-19 23:20 +0100
        Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? "G. Branden Robinson" <g.branden.robinson@gmail.com> - 2022-11-20 01:00 +0100
          Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Pierre-Elliott Bécue <peb@debian.org> - 2022-11-20 12:00 +0100
            Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Charles Plessy <plessy@debian.org> - 2022-11-20 14:20 +0100
            Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? "G. Branden Robinson" <g.branden.robinson@gmail.com> - 2022-11-20 21:50 +0100
              Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? "Roberto A. Foglietta" <roberto.foglietta@gmail.com> - 2022-11-20 22:30 +0100
                Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Michael Neuffer <neuffer@neuffer.com> - 2022-11-20 23:00 +0100
                Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Mattia Rizzolo <mattia@debian.org> - 2022-11-20 23:30 +0100
                Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Michael Neuffer <neuffer@neuffer.com> - 2022-11-21 00:50 +0100
                Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Steve McIntyre <steve@einval.com> - 2022-11-21 01:00 +0100
                Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? "Roberto A. Foglietta" <roberto.foglietta@gmail.com> - 2022-11-21 03:20 +0100
                Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? "G. Branden Robinson" <g.branden.robinson@gmail.com> - 2022-11-21 08:10 +0100
                Aw: Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Steffen Möller <steffen_moeller@gmx.de> - 2022-11-21 16:10 +0100
                Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? "G. Branden Robinson" <g.branden.robinson@gmail.com> - 2022-11-21 03:20 +0100
                Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2022-11-21 08:10 +0100
                Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Roberto C. Sánchez <roberto@debian.org> - 2022-11-22 04:50 +0100
                Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Jonathan Dowland <jmtd@debian.org> - 2022-11-21 17:40 +0100
                Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Sam Hartman <hartmans@debian.org> - 2022-11-21 18:00 +0100
                Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Hanno 'Rince' Wagner <wagner@debian.org> - 2022-11-21 18:10 +0100
                Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? "G. Branden Robinson" <g.branden.robinson@gmail.com> - 2022-11-21 19:10 +0100
                Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Diederik de Haas <didi.debian@cknow.org> - 2022-11-21 03:10 +0100
                Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Tiago Bortoletto Vaz <tiago@debian.org> - 2022-11-21 03:10 +0100
                Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Pierre-Elliott Bécue <peb@debian.org> - 2022-11-21 11:40 +0100
                Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Wouter Verhelst <wouter@debian.org> - 2022-12-14 00:00 +0100
                Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? "Andrew M.A. Cater" <amacater@einval.com> - 2022-12-14 10:10 +0100
                Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Gunnar Wolf <gwolf@debian.org> - 2022-12-14 18:50 +0100
                Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? "Roberto A. Foglietta" <roberto.foglietta@gmail.com> - 2022-12-14 22:40 +0100
                Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Charles Plessy <plessy@debian.org> - 2022-12-14 23:10 +0100
                Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? "Roberto A. Foglietta" <roberto.foglietta@gmail.com> - 2022-12-14 10:10 +0100
              Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> - 2022-11-21 00:50 +0100
                Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Sam Hartman <hartmans@debian.org> - 2022-11-21 06:00 +0100
                Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? "G. Branden Robinson" <g.branden.robinson@gmail.com> - 2022-11-21 08:10 +0100
                Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Sam Hartman <hartmans@suchdamage.org> - 2022-11-21 16:10 +0100
                Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? "G. Branden Robinson" <g.branden.robinson@gmail.com> - 2022-11-21 21:30 +0100
                Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? nick black <dankamongmen@gmail.com> - 2022-11-21 23:00 +0100
                Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2022-11-22 06:50 +0100
                Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Marco d'Itri <md@Linux.IT> - 2022-12-17 20:20 +0100
                Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? "G. Branden Robinson" <g.branden.robinson@gmail.com> - 2022-12-18 23:20 +0100
                Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2022-12-19 06:30 +0100
                Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? "G. Branden Robinson" <g.branden.robinson@gmail.com> - 2022-12-19 17:40 +0100
                Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Marco d'Itri <md@Linux.IT> - 2022-12-20 18:00 +0100
              Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Pierre-Elliott Bécue <peb@debian.org> - 2022-11-21 11:40 +0100
    Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2022-11-21 23:10 +0100
      Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2022-11-22 07:00 +0100
      Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Alexander Reichle-Schmehl <alexander@alphamar.org> - 2022-11-22 10:50 +0100
  Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Judit Foglszinger <urbec@riseup.net> - 2022-11-20 12:00 +0100
    Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? Ansgar <ansgar@debian.org> - 2022-11-20 12:20 +0100
      Re: Fortunes-off - do we need this as a package for Bookworm? David Prévot <david@tilapin.org> - 2022-11-20 15:50 +0100
  Re: Removing software because we disagree with its values Sam Hartman <hartmans@debian.org> - 2022-11-20 21:50 +0100
    Re: Removing software because we disagree with its values "Andrew M.A. Cater" <amacater@einval.com> - 2022-11-20 22:00 +0100
      Re: Removing software because we disagree with its values Sam Hartman <hartmans@debian.org> - 2022-11-20 22:30 +0100
      Re: Removing software because we disagree with its values Roberto C. Sánchez <roberto@debian.org> - 2022-11-21 00:00 +0100
      Re: Removing software because we disagree with its values Diederik de Haas <didi.debian@cknow.org> - 2022-11-21 03:10 +0100
    Re: Removing software because we disagree with its values Roberto C. Sánchez <roberto@debian.org> - 2022-11-20 23:40 +0100

csiph-web