Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.debian.user > #160738 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Alex Vong <alexvong1995@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-11-18 15:50 +0100 |
| Last post | 2015-11-19 02:30 +0100 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 110 — 22 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: Adobe Flash Alex Vong <alexvong1995@gmail.com> - 2015-11-18 15:50 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2015-11-18 16:10 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash Siard <shiems146@kpnplanet.nl> - 2015-11-18 16:40 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2015-11-18 19:50 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2015-11-18 20:40 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2015-11-19 00:50 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2015-11-19 01:30 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> - 2015-11-19 14:10 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash moxalt <moxalt@riseup.net> - 2015-11-18 19:00 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2015-11-18 19:00 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash moxalt <moxalt@riseup.net> - 2015-11-18 20:30 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2015-11-18 20:40 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash moxalt <moxalt@riseup.net> - 2015-11-19 18:00 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash Ric Moore <wayward4now@gmail.com> - 2015-11-20 01:10 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash Doug <dmcgarrett@optonline.net> - 2015-11-20 01:40 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash moxalt <moxalt@riseup.net> - 2015-11-20 08:00 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash Renaud (Ron) OLGIATI <renaud@olgiati-in-paraguay.org> - 2015-11-20 09:30 +0100
Re: The word 'should'. (was: Adobe Flash) moxalt <moxalt@riseup.net> - 2015-11-21 05:50 +0100
Re: The word 'should'. (was: Adobe Flash) Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2015-11-21 10:00 +0100
Re: The word 'should'. (was: Adobe Flash) Renaud (Ron) OLGIATI <renaud@olgiati-in-paraguay.org> - 2015-11-21 10:30 +0100
Re: The word 'should'. (was: Adobe Flash) moxalt <moxalt@riseup.net> - 2015-11-21 13:40 +0100
Re: The word 'should'. John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2015-11-21 14:50 +0100
Re: The word 'should'. Mauro Condarelli <mc5686@mclink.it> - 2015-11-21 15:00 +0100
Re: The word 'should'. moxalt <moxalt@riseup.net> - 2015-11-21 18:20 +0100
Re: The word 'should'. Mauro Condarelli <mc5686@mclink.it> - 2015-11-21 18:40 +0100
Re: The word 'should'. Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2015-11-21 23:50 +0100
Re: The word 'should'. Mauro Condarelli <mc5686@mclink.it> - 2015-11-22 00:50 +0100
Re: The word 'should'. moxalt <moxalt@riseup.net> - 2015-11-22 04:10 +0100
Re: The word 'should'. Mario Castelán Castro <marioxcc.MT@yandex.com> - 2015-11-22 05:20 +0100
Re: The word 'should'. Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2015-11-22 12:20 +0100
Re: The word 'should'. Ben Stones <ben@b3ns.com> - 2015-11-22 13:00 +0100
Re: The word 'should'. Chris Bannister <cbannister@slingshot.co.nz> - 2015-11-23 00:10 +0100
Re: The word 'should'. moxalt <moxalt@riseup.net> - 2015-11-23 18:50 +0100
Re: Mauro Condarelli <mc5686@mclink.it> - 2015-11-22 18:00 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2015-11-20 09:30 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash Mario Castelán Castro <marioxcc.MT@yandex.com> - 2015-11-22 00:40 +0100
Which repositories are permitted and which are not Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2015-11-22 01:20 +0100
The word 'should' Mario Castelán Castro <marioxcc.MT@yandex.com> - 2015-11-22 04:50 +0100
Re: The word 'should' John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2015-11-22 05:00 +0100
Re: The word 'should' Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2015-11-22 12:20 +0100
Re: The word 'should' Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2015-11-22 17:50 +0100
Re: The word 'should' Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2015-11-22 18:00 +0100
Re: The word 'should' moxalt <moxalt@riseup.net> - 2015-11-22 20:00 +0100
Re: The word 'should' Mario Castelán Castro <marioxcc.MT@yandex.com> - 2015-11-22 23:40 +0100
Re: The word 'should' Mario Castelán Castro <marioxcc.MT@yandex.com> - 2015-11-22 23:40 +0100
Re: The word 'should' Renaud (Ron) OLGIATI <renaud@olgiati-in-paraguay.org> - 2015-11-23 00:00 +0100
Re: The word 'should' Mario Castelán Castro <marioxcc.MT@yandex.com> - 2015-11-23 00:10 +0100
Re: The word 'should' Renaud (Ron) OLGIATI <renaud@olgiati-in-paraguay.org> - 2015-11-23 00:40 +0100
Re: The word 'should' Mario Castelán Castro <marioxcc.MT@yandex.com> - 2015-11-23 00:40 +0100
Re: The word 'should' Ben Stones <ben@b3ns.com> - 2015-11-23 01:30 +0100
Re: The word 'should' Bob Holtzman <holtzm@cox.net> - 2015-11-22 21:30 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2015-11-20 01:10 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash moxalt <moxalt@riseup.net> - 2015-11-20 07:50 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash Renaud (Ron) OLGIATI <renaud@olgiati-in-paraguay.org> - 2015-11-20 09:30 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash moxalt <moxalt@riseup.net> - 2015-11-21 05:10 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2015-11-21 05:30 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash moxalt <moxalt@riseup.net> - 2015-11-21 05:50 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash Glenn English <ghe@srv.slsware.net> - 2015-11-21 08:00 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash Renaud (Ron) OLGIATI <renaud@olgiati-in-paraguay.org> - 2015-11-21 09:40 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2015-11-21 10:00 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash Renaud (Ron) OLGIATI <renaud@olgiati-in-paraguay.org> - 2015-11-21 10:20 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2015-11-21 14:40 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash moxalt <moxalt@riseup.net> - 2015-11-21 18:10 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash Ric Moore <wayward4now@gmail.com> - 2015-11-21 16:00 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2015-11-21 10:00 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash moxalt <moxalt@riseup.net> - 2015-11-21 13:30 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash moxalt <moxalt@riseup.net> - 2015-11-21 13:40 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash Renaud (Ron) OLGIATI <renaud@olgiati-in-paraguay.org> - 2015-11-21 10:20 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2015-11-21 15:00 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash Ric Moore <wayward4now@gmail.com> - 2015-11-21 16:20 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash moxalt <moxalt@riseup.net> - 2015-11-21 18:10 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash Ric Moore <wayward4now@gmail.com> - 2015-11-21 19:10 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash Chris Bannister <cbannister@slingshot.co.nz> - 2015-11-22 02:40 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash Ric Moore <wayward4now@gmail.com> - 2015-11-21 16:00 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash moxalt <moxalt@riseup.net> - 2015-11-21 18:10 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash moxalt <moxalt@riseup.net> - 2015-11-21 05:50 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2015-11-21 19:00 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2015-11-20 13:40 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2015-11-20 14:20 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash Chris Bannister <cbannister@slingshot.co.nz> - 2015-11-20 15:00 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2015-11-20 16:40 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash Chris Bannister <cbannister@slingshot.co.nz> - 2015-11-20 17:00 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2015-11-21 12:30 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash "Thomas Schmitt" <scdbackup@gmx.net> - 2015-11-21 13:00 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash moxalt <moxalt@riseup.net> - 2015-11-21 13:30 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash "Thomas Schmitt" <scdbackup@gmx.net> - 2015-11-21 14:00 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash Ric Moore <wayward4now@gmail.com> - 2015-11-21 16:30 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash moxalt <moxalt@riseup.net> - 2015-11-21 18:00 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash Ric Moore <wayward4now@gmail.com> - 2015-11-21 19:00 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash moxalt <moxalt@riseup.net> - 2015-11-22 04:10 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2015-11-22 14:10 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2015-11-22 14:50 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash Ric Moore <wayward4now@gmail.com> - 2015-11-19 00:40 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash Mario Castelán Castro <marioxcc.MT@yandex.com> - 2015-11-22 01:00 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash moxalt <moxalt@riseup.net> - 2015-11-22 04:00 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash Ric Moore <wayward4now@gmail.com> - 2015-11-22 16:10 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash moxalt <moxalt@riseup.net> - 2015-11-22 19:50 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash Chris Bannister <cbannister@slingshot.co.nz> - 2015-11-23 00:10 +0100
"operating system" Mario Castelán Castro <marioxcc.MT@yandex.com> - 2015-11-23 02:50 +0100
pointless linguistic one-upmanship (was Re: "operating system") Jonathan Dowland <jmtd@debian.org> - 2015-11-23 10:40 +0100
Re: pointless linguistic one-upmanship (was Re: "operating system") Bob Holtzman <holtzm@cox.net> - 2015-11-23 20:30 +0100
Re: pointless linguistic one-upmanship (was Re: "operating system") Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2015-11-24 11:30 +0100
Re: pointless linguistic one-upmanship (was Re: "operating system") moxalt <moxalt@riseup.net> - 2015-11-24 15:50 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2015-11-18 19:40 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash Tom Ashley <tomashleyjr@gmail.com> - 2015-11-18 22:10 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2015-11-19 00:30 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2015-11-19 01:00 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2015-11-19 01:30 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash Tom Ashley <tomashleyjr@gmail.com> - 2015-11-19 02:30 +0100
Re: Adobe Flash Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2015-11-19 02:30 +0100
Page 3 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 Next page →
| From | Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-22 17:50 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: The word 'should' |
| Message-ID | <qxFZU-6ql-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #160967 |
> That is precisely what I am talking about. The arrogance of it. You have no
> right to insist on our doing anything. You personally really are in league
> with the Taliban.
He has the right to say or write anything he wants, pretty much.
He indeed doesn't have a right to *force* you to do something, but he
has every right to tell you what he thinks you should do, just like you
have the right to ignore him.
Don't forget that we Free Software advocate are a tiny, mostly powerless
minority, so ranting against us because we tell you what we think you
should do ranks pretty high on the "ridiculous" metric.
Stefan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-22 18:00 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: The word 'should' |
| Message-ID | <qxG9A-6uV-13@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #160987 |
On Sunday 22 November 2015 16:40:53 Stefan Monnier wrote: > Don't forget that we Free Software advocate are a tiny, mostly powerless > minority, so ranting against us because we tell you what we think you > should do ranks pretty high on the "ridiculous" metric. Granted - but I am not "ranting" against most of you. I am "ranting" against that extraordinary rudeness and arrogance. I do not recall you ever behaving in that way - so far as I remember you do only advocate it, which is fine. If you have been arrogant and rude, please don't remind me ;-) - I'd rather not blacklist anyone else. ;-) I genuinely don't understand why those of you who feel that one should never use any of the contents of the contrib and non-free repositories don't just use an entirely and completely Free distro. I use Free whenever I can. But I am not willing to change my entire lifestyle and not watch television or listen to the radio via my computer in order to use only Free software. And you may not mind being called immoral. I do. Sticks and stones etc. I never did buy that. Lisi
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moxalt <moxalt@riseup.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-22 20:00 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: The word 'should' |
| Message-ID | <qxI1H-7IS-7@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #160989 |
On Sun, 22 Nov 2015 16:53:35 +0000, Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> wrote: > And you may not mind being called immoral. I do. Sticks and stones etc. I > never did buy that. This is true. I'm an extremely sensitive person in real life. My furious responses to provocation have probably made that clear, as well as my desperate need to have the last word. These are all shortcomings of mine. Even little things. When you said 'bully to you' twice after my one of my rants, I nearly lost it. I felt utterly trivial and lost. I literally felt crushed. I don't know why. I never call people immoral. I call their actions unethical, at most. Human nature is neither here nor there. There is no intrinsic evil. Actions can be criticised for their negative consequences- even so, I prefer to call such things unethical- it is a softer way of putting things, and 'morality' has 'religious' (?) connotations I would rather avoid. Also 'ethical' sounds better than 'moral'. It has a more... analytical air to it, rather than a gut decrying-type thing. I think Mario went a bit too far there, in comparing open-sourcers to 'misbehaving children'. Regardless of our disagreements, we shouldn't resort to blatant condescension. I'm sorry. To everyone really. I should (lol- there it is again) have stepped aside earlier. I'm sorry.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mario Castelán Castro <marioxcc.MT@yandex.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-22 23:40 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: The word 'should' |
| Message-ID | <qxLsC-1Ct-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #160967 |
> an exerciser to the reader. *exercise
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mario Castelán Castro <marioxcc.MT@yandex.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-22 23:40 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: The word 'should' |
| Message-ID | <qxLsC-1Ct-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #160967 |
El 22/11/15 a las 05:10, Lisi Reisz escribió: > You personally really are in league > with the Taliban. "We know what is right and the rest of you will do as you > are told." The comparison is flawed. I am not forcing anyone to use free software. I try to convince with arguments. > There are children starving, people being bombed, dreadful diseases > unconquered, antibiotics rendered useless by gross misuse, and you are being > as rude and unpleasant as this because some people choose to use a piece of > software of which you disapprove. This is a perfect example of a non-sequitur fallacy; you mention irrelevant things, then mention a supposed conclusion drawn from those irrelevant mentions. Basically you are saying "The sky is blue; therefore the Riemann conjecture follows". At any rate, given that my discourse is just as unpleasant as being "bombed" and you *willingly "endure"* it (you have been reading and replying to this thread *for days*), and that you are so aware of the problems that war causes, it follows according to *your logic* that you should volunteer in the Red Cross to save innocent people in Syria. You are already enduring the suffering of being bombed in this mailing list (or so you claim), so you have nothing to lose and you will do much good to mankind. If this sound absurd, do not blame me; I am not the one who is comparing discourse with war; that is you. > You find me a Spaniard who > can understand English tenses and moods correctly. So you are implicitly asserting that you are a native speaker of Spanish (for otherwise, your comment would be irrelevant). Also, you judge that you are competent enough to understand this subtle part of English correctly (subtle enough for many native spekers to misunderstand it). Therefore, again according to your own logic, non-native speakers may be competent enough to understand the subtleties of English. Yet some messages ago you told an user that he is unqualified to comment on English because he is incompetent, for the reason of not being a native speaker!. Here is the verbatim quote: > On Saturday 21 November 2015 17:36:46 Mauro Condarelli wrote: >> Unfortunately English is not my mother language, so my command of the >> language is lacking (so say the least), please bear with me. > > Which might limit your ability to comment on the finer nuances of the meaning > of the language. > > Please don't take that as a criticism - my knowledge of Italian is only just > the right side of non-existent - but you aren't in a good position to > comment. > > Lisi Although you first said "might", which is correct, in the following paragraph you substituted that tone with one of certainty (because you said "you _aren't_ [...]"). Since you just acknowledge that this is a mistake, you owe him an apology. ===== It has been a pleasure to show the mailing list how illogical your behavior is according to your own principles. If you reply, I will leave the task of proving you wrong with your own reasoning as an exerciser to the reader. I have spent enough time on that already. At least I accomplished something: there will be one more and much needed volunteer for the Red Cross in Syria ;). Good luck!.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Renaud (Ron) OLGIATI <renaud@olgiati-in-paraguay.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-23 00:00 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: The word 'should' |
| Message-ID | <qxLLY-1Jb-29@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #161011 |
On Sun, 22 Nov 2015 16:28:31 -0600
Mario Castelán Castro <marioxcc.MT@yandex.com> wrote:
> > You personally really are in league what we can and cannot do.
> > with the Taliban. "We know what is right and the rest of you will do as you
> > are told."
> The comparison is flawed. I am not forcing anyone to use free software.
> I try to convince with arguments.
No; you are not trying to convince, with or without arguments, but you attempt to dictate what we can and cannot do.
Wont work.
Cheers,
Ron.
--
It is easier to fight for one's principles
than to live up to them.
-- Alfred Adler
-- http://www.olgiati-in-paraguay.org --
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mario Castelán Castro <marioxcc.MT@yandex.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-23 00:10 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: The word 'should' |
| Message-ID | <qxLVE-21Z-13@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #161014 |
El 22/11/15 a las 16:55, Renaud (Ron) OLGIATI escribió: > On Sun, 22 Nov 2015 16:28:31 -0600 > Mario Castelán Castro <marioxcc.MT@yandex.com> wrote: > >>> You personally really are in league what we can and cannot do. >>> with the Taliban. "We know what is right and the rest of you will do as you >>> are told." > >> The comparison is flawed. I am not forcing anyone to use free software. >> I try to convince with arguments. > > No; you are not trying to convince, with or without arguments, but you attempt to dictate what we can and cannot do. > > Wont work. You are asserting something without any support. Dicating implies coercion. Show how I am coercing or trying to coerce people.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Renaud (Ron) OLGIATI <renaud@olgiati-in-paraguay.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-23 00:40 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: The word 'should' |
| Message-ID | <qxMoG-2bB-15@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #161016 |
On Sun, 22 Nov 2015 17:03:47 -0600
Mario Castelán Castro <marioxcc.MT@yandex.com> wrote:
> >>> You personally really are in league what we can and cannot do.
> >>> with the Taliban. "We know what is right and the rest of you will do as you
> >>> are told."
> >> The comparison is flawed. I am not forcing anyone to use free software.
> >> I try to convince with arguments.
> > No; you are not trying to convince, with or without arguments, but you attempt to dictate what we can and cannot do.
> > Wont work.
> You are asserting something without any support. Dicating implies
> coercion. Show how I am coercing or trying to coerce people.
By saying we "should" do something.
Cheers,
Ron.
--
Fortunate is he for whom the belle toils.
-- http://www.olgiati-in-paraguay.org --
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mario Castelán Castro <marioxcc.MT@yandex.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-23 00:40 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: The word 'should' |
| Message-ID | <qxMoG-2bB-21@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #161022 |
El 22/11/15 a las 17:31, Renaud (Ron) OLGIATI escribió: > On Sun, 22 Nov 2015 17:03:47 -0600 > Mario Castelán Castro <marioxcc.MT@yandex.com> wrote: > >>>>> You personally really are in league what we can and cannot do. >>>>> with the Taliban. "We know what is right and the rest of you will do as you >>>>> are told." > >>>> The comparison is flawed. I am not forcing anyone to use free software. >>>> I try to convince with arguments. > >>> No; you are not trying to convince, with or without arguments, but you attempt to dictate what we can and cannot do. > >>> Wont work. > >> You are asserting something without any support. Dicating implies >> coercion. Show how I am coercing or trying to coerce people. > > By saying we "should" do something. You _should_ immediately throw all of your money down the drain. Did you do that (or better: would you have, if the message ended with the previous phrase)?. Of course not. Why not?. Because it seems absurd. to you You would only have done so if I *convinced* you; that is by definition, the antithesis of forcing and dictating inasmuch as it refers to coercion (as in the word "dictator"). The conclusion is that saying "should" through the Internet to a stranger has no coercive power and therefore it is not "dictating".
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ben Stones <ben@b3ns.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-23 01:30 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: The word 'should' |
| Message-ID | <qxNb4-2Jj-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #161023 |
Hello everyone, Is it possible if we can draw this e-mail chain to a close? Point scoring and constant bickering only encourages more of the same, and it is distressing to read. When we are angry, we often say and do things in the heat of the moment and this is often the cause of conflicts, and the more we do it, the more we get back. At the end of every e-mail address is a real person we are talking to. If just one person takes the step not to respond negatively, others will follow.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bob Holtzman <holtzm@cox.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-22 21:30 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: The word 'should' |
| Message-ID | <qxJqN-iz-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #160960 |
On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 11:10:16AM +0000, Lisi Reisz wrote: > On Sunday 22 November 2015 03:43:36 Mario Castelán Castro wrote: > > We have to keep > > insisting, like parents keep insisting on their misbehaving children, > > because people and children are irresponsible and need to be told things > > many times. > > That is precisely what I am talking about. The arrogance of it. You have no > right to insist on our doing anything. You personally really are in league > with the Taliban. "We know what is right and the rest of you will do as you > are told." > > There are children starving, people being bombed, dreadful diseases > unconquered, antibiotics rendered useless by gross misuse, and you are being > as rude and unpleasant as this because some people choose to use a piece of > software of which you disapprove. > > And you dare to call us "misbehaving children". At least I now know that > everything from you need only be treated with the contempt it clearly > deserves. Well said! -- Bob Holtzman A fair fight is the result of poor planning.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-20 01:10 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <qwHr3-87x-15@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #160811 |
On Thursday 19 November 2015 16:55:43 moxalt wrote: > On Wed, 18 Nov 2015 19:34:38 +0000, Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wednesday 18 November 2015 19:24:31 moxalt wrote: > > > > The OP is currently watching the > > > > news on Doze. Hardly more secure than flash > > > > > > And OP should do neither. > > > > That's a bit arrogant - saying that other people shouldn't watch the news > > on their computers because you would choose not to do so. > > > > Lisi > > I don't think advocating that others should follow certain ethical > principles is at all arrogant. What you're accusing me of is telling others > to reject non-free software because I do so. This is not true. I think > people in general should not use proprietary software, and I comply by this > ethical principle. In what way is recommending that others should do the > same arrogant? Telling others what they "should" do is arrogant. Especially on this forum on occasions where people are only using the Debian repositories. It is admirable that you are prepared to make sacrifices for your principles. Telling others that they "should" make sacrifices for your principles is arrogant. Persuade them by all means. But if you are so dead set against all use of non-free or not-quite-fully-free software, use one of these: http://www.gnu.org/distros/ Contrib and non-free Debian repositories exist. We are entitled to use them in peace and without being given moral lectures and being carpeted like naughty schoolboys. I for one, and I am not saying that anyone else "should" do it, use FLOSS wherever possible. But I want to use e.g. the BBC site, and I cannot do so with FLOSS and Wheezy. So I use software that isn't in main. You I assume have only main in your sources.list. Bully for you. Some of us choose to use the other repositories as well in order to use our computers more fully. And I use Linux. You use GNU/Linux. Again, bully for you. That is a matter of semantics. Lisi > For instance, I hold that people should not kill each other needlessly. I > comply by this principle too, and do not kill people. In what way is > recommending to others that they follow this principle arrogant?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moxalt <moxalt@riseup.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-20 07:50 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <qwNG9-3Df-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #160829 |
On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 00:02:55 +0000, Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thursday 19 November 2015 16:55:43 moxalt wrote: > > On Wed, 18 Nov 2015 19:34:38 +0000, Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > On Wednesday 18 November 2015 19:24:31 moxalt wrote: > > > > > The OP is currently watching the > > > > > news on Doze. Hardly more secure than flash > > > > > > > > And OP should do neither. > > > > > > That's a bit arrogant - saying that other people shouldn't watch the news > > > on their computers because you would choose not to do so. > > > > > > Lisi > > > > I don't think advocating that others should follow certain ethical > > principles is at all arrogant. What you're accusing me of is telling others > > to reject non-free software because I do so. This is not true. I think > > people in general should not use proprietary software, and I comply by this > > ethical principle. In what way is recommending that others should do the > > same arrogant? > > Telling others what they "should" do is arrogant. I disagree. Condemning anyone for ever telling anyone to do anything as 'arrogant' is plain silly. If I am to be called 'arrogant' for advocating certain principles, so be it. What word would you have me use so that others do not feel uncomfortable? What would you have me do? Should (there it is again!) I simply deliver my opinions in terms of imperatives- do this and do that? That seems far more arrogant to me. I find it somewhat peculiar that you would find the word 'should' so triggering. I tell people that they should do things all the time, and others tell me that I should do things all the time. I am not in any way offended by this. If I agree, I will express my agreement and do the thing that they think I should do. If I disagree, I will explain why and refuse. > Especially on this forum > on occasions where people are only using the Debian repositories. I don't understand this. > It is admirable that you are prepared to make sacrifices for your > principles. Telling others that they "should" make sacrifices for your > principles is arrogant. Persuade them by all means. But if you are so dead > set against all use of non-free or not-quite-fully-free software, use one of > these: http://www.gnu.org/distros/ I was a Trisquel user for a long time. I still recommend Trisquel to those new to the world of free software. Personally I prefer Debian. As long as non-free and contrib are not enabled, Debian is just as free as any of those distributions. However, as https://www.gnu.org/distros/optionally-free-not-enough.html points out, distributions which merely present a choice between freedom and subjugation are not good enough for people who are not committed free software users and who are not prepared to defend their freedom when the choice is offered. This is why the distributions listed at http://www.gnu.org/distros/free-distros.html should be recommended to the general public. > Contrib and non-free Debian repositories exist. We are entitled to use them > in peace and without being given moral lectures and being carpeted like > naughty schoolboys. This is true. > And I use Linux. You use GNU/Linux. Again, bully for you. That is a matter > of semantics. I use both Linux and GNU/Linux. Linux is my kernel; GNU/Linux is my operating system. Once upon a time, I called the whole thing Linux too.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Renaud (Ron) OLGIATI <renaud@olgiati-in-paraguay.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-20 09:30 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <qwPeW-4Iu-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #160838 |
On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 09:43:49 +0300
moxalt <moxalt@riseup.net> wrote:
> Should (there it is again!) I simply deliver my opinions
> in terms of imperatives- do this and do that?
You could, without trying to impose your opinions on others, just tell tell them what you do, and let them decide whether to follow your example or not.
But telling them what they "should" do, unless it relates to behaviour that affexts you directly(*) is the first step on the road to intolerance, persecution, the Talibans and the Inquisition, etc.
Cheers,
Ron.
* Of course there is the difference between "You should avoid punching me in the nose" and "You should use only FLOSS".
--
The only way to get rid of a temptation is to yield to it.
-- Oscar Wilde
-- http://www.olgiati-in-paraguay.org --
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moxalt <moxalt@riseup.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-21 05:10 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <qx7ES-7D-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #160842 |
On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 05:19:46 -0300, Renaud (Ron) OLGIATI <renaud@olgiati-in-paraguay.org> wrote: > On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 09:43:49 +0300 > moxalt <moxalt@riseup.net> wrote: > > > Should (there it is again!) I simply deliver my opinions > > in terms of imperatives- do this and do that? > > You could, without trying to impose your opinions on others, just tell tell > them what you do, and let them decide whether to follow your example or not. > But telling them what they "should" do, unless it relates to behaviour that > affexts you directly(*) is the first step on the road to intolerance, > persecution, the Talibans and the Inquisition, etc. Wow. The seemingly innocent word 'should' is in fact the first step to the Inquisition. What an opinion. What a place! Who knew the Debian-users list was a den populated by people who overreact to 'should', as if it's the Great Satan or something. I understand that everyone's rallying against the outsider here, but really guys? 'Should'? > * Of course there is the difference between "You should avoid punching me in > the nose" and "You should use only FLOSS". Not really. Both are actions I would engage in, and would like others to do the same. I never thought the word 'should' was such a big issue.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-21 05:30 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <qx7Yd-fD-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #160886 |
moxalt writes: > Not really. Both are actions I would engage in, and would like others > to do the same. I never thought the word 'should' was such a big > issue. Right. "Should" is just an opinion. If you don't like it ignore it. Or express your own contrary opinion. -- John Hasler jhasler@newsguy.com Elmwood, WI USA
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moxalt <moxalt@riseup.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-21 05:50 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <qx8hz-mB-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #160887 |
On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 22:28:39 -0600, John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> wrote: > moxalt writes: > > Not really. Both are actions I would engage in, and would like others > > to do the same. I never thought the word 'should' was such a big > > issue. > > Right. "Should" is just an opinion. If you don't like it ignore it. > Or express your own contrary opinion. Indeed.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Glenn English <ghe@srv.slsware.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-21 08:00 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <qxajn-1FR-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #160888 |
On Nov 20, 2015, at 9:48 PM, moxalt <moxalt@riseup.net> wrote: >> "Should" http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/should http://www.thefreedictionary.com/should https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/should Chill a bit, folks. There's no question that vi is better than emacs :-).. -- Glenn English
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Renaud (Ron) OLGIATI <renaud@olgiati-in-paraguay.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-21 09:40 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <qxbS9-2MW-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #160891 |
On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 23:23:02 -0700
Glenn English <ghe@srv.slsware.net> wrote:
> Chill a bit, folks. There's no question that vi is better than emacs :-)..
Of course it is; yet we do not go round preaching to all and sundry "You should use vi"...
Cheers,
Ron.
--
You do ill if you praise, but worse if you censure,
when you do not rightly understand.
-- Leonardo da Vinci
-- http://www.olgiati-in-paraguay.org --
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-21 10:00 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <qxcbw-2Un-13@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #160891 |
On Saturday 21 November 2015 06:23:02 Glenn English wrote: > On Nov 20, 2015, at 9:48 PM, moxalt <moxalt@riseup.net> wrote: > >> "Should" > > http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/should > http://www.thefreedictionary.com/should > https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/should > > Chill a bit, folks. There's no question that vi is better than emacs :-).. :-) Of course!! The problem is well highlighted by these dictionary offerings. "Should" expresses obligation and duty, not a recommendation or preference. Lisi
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user
csiph-web