problems with this
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| jimf Apr 16, 2006 8:44 AM EDT |
It may not be the author's intent, but the appearance is that Christianity is trying to hijack GPL. FOSS, the GPL, and Linux are inseparable from a moral and ethical stance about how software is developed and used in the society. That said, the issue is 'agnostic' and any implication that Christianity is more 'entitled' than other religion or group with ethical concerns is totally wrong. |
| devnet Apr 16, 2006 11:11 AM EDT |
Agreed Jim.. Silly really for them to do this. Espectially considering that "Christian Philosophy" is something that is too diluted to categorize (too many Christian religions out there). I like how one reader stated this: "Might as well make arguments that free software is better for lesbians, or african americans, or people with false teeth." I said the same thing with some of my blog articles last year when I saw Linux beginning down this road. In fact, I actually began an entire section of my blog for stupid categorizations like this: http://linux-blog.org/index.php?/archives/27-The-Great-Schis... So, I've said it once with "Penguin in the Pew" and I'll say it again...keep religion out of Linux and Open Source. Use it, fine...just don't try to stamp a christian stamp on it. It alienates rather than attracts. |
| SamShazaam Apr 17, 2006 6:07 AM EDT |
In the past there have been certain Christian groups denouncing the GPL and Free Software in general. Mostly they seemed to buy into MS propaganda that without MS there would be no personal computers. A number of other groups have thought this position through more thoroughly and reached different conclusions. I do not get from the article that the GPL or FOSS is about to be "hijacked" in any way. Why is there this allergic reaction any time a discussion of faith comes up? There is more to the human experience than science and technology. It seems that you are trying to enforce divisions that do not need to exist. |
| jimf Apr 17, 2006 6:20 AM EDT |
Sam said:
Quoting:It seems that you are trying to enforce divisions that do not need to exist. Who's wanting to create divisions? :) The whole point of my post is that I don't want divisions. |
| rsheim Apr 17, 2006 6:52 AM EDT |
I believe too in freedom of religion, but to me it also means freedom from religion if I so choose. Nonetheless, I find too often those so certain in their beliefs cannot bear the sight of someone that has no need for religion. Whereas true, sincere believers that do not resort to force their views upon others cause me no problem. I don't see the need for a relgious discussion on this site. I'm barely hanging on here as it is. |
| jdixon Apr 17, 2006 8:27 AM EDT |
> but the appearance is that Christianity is trying to hijack GPL. I don't see that. Instead, I see a group of people who believe that the GPL upholds the strongest principles and traditions of their faith, and are arguing for it's use by people who share that faith. |
| dcparris Apr 17, 2006 9:59 AM EDT |
>I don't see that. Instead, I see a group of people who believe that the GPL upholds the strongest principles and traditions of their faith, and are arguing for it's use by people who share that faith. That is ultimately what this has always been about. I have never understood why, when I make this point myself, some insist that I am trying to capture or hi-jack the GPL. There is no logic to that kind of thinking in light of how I or others have written. None of us have written that FOSS belongs exclusively to our faith, but that FOSS is useful to, and fits philosophically/theologically with our faith. None of us have ever made the use of FOSS a religious issue - that usually is what others assume about us without reading critically. Critical readers are able to discern the difference. |
| devnet Apr 17, 2006 5:31 PM EDT |
@ dcparris, It is because you wrongly assume that all Christian beliefs are the same. You generalize about religion...does that mean you are generalizing about the GPL? Who can say? When you generalize about religion you lose all credibility. In your "IT as Ministry" document, you refer to the church...What church? I am a Christian and I don't go to a church...this is a generalization yet again. I don't take offense at it but you're trying to define something that cannot be presently defined and it is irksome to say the least. One gets a 'preachy' tone from it...remember that minister means "lowly servant" and not "lofty lecturer" @ jdixon, "I don't see that. Instead, I see a group of people who believe that the GPL upholds the strongest principles and traditions of their faith, and are arguing for it's use by people who share that faith." The GPL is a license for distributing software...not a flag of religious dogma. When developing software, the one good thing about doing it is that you are anonymous. No one cares if you are male or female...where you're from, what you do, how many times the cops have thrown you in jail, nothing. The only thing that matters is the software and that it continues forward. It's that anonymity that needs to remain...I would hate it if we begin to divide Open Source Software up as "Catholic approved" software or "Homesexual Approved" software. Instead, why can't it just remain as it has since it began..just plain software. Remember that "a house divided against itself cannot stand". Let's keep FOSS free from any stamp, blemish, label, etc. Let's keep it just software. |
| devnet Apr 17, 2006 5:40 PM EDT |
dcparris, I reread your post and thought of something else...you said in part "None of us have written that FOSS belongs exclusively to our faith, but that FOSS is useful to, and fits philosophically/theologically with our faith." THAT my friend, is travelling down a road that many people don't want anyone to go down. Sharing philosophy with something will blur the line between what is acceptable, what isn't acceptable, and where the lines are drawn. No agnostic or non-christian wants to have FOSS labeled 'in harmony' with Christianity. Label it as FOSS and leave the stigma you're attaching to it aside.. |
| dcparris Apr 17, 2006 7:35 PM EDT |
(1) No one has suggested - explicitly or implicitly - in any article I have read, that Christianity is "more entitled" to FOSS than any other group. This article, in particular, did not do so. That is Jimf reading something into the article that is not there. (2) It is not our fault that the concepts of Freedom and Sharing are not unique to Richard M. Stallman's "Church of Emacs". Stallman made it a moral issue and Stallman believes that Christians - and people of other faiths - should make it a moral issue. Yet, when we do, we get blasted for it. If you don't like the fact that many of us are embracing FOSS, fine. Just don't fault us or attack us for doing so. (3) Marco made no attacks on non-believers, yet was wrongly accused of attempting to hi-jack the GPL. Jimf didn't even attempt to point out what made him think the way he did. He just made an accusation without any basis for doing so. It is wrong to attack someone without cause. (4) Readers of LXer have the freedom to choose what to read and what not to read. If you are going to be offended, you might choose not to read it. At the very least, LXer readers should respect the beliefs of others. I find myself offended by the beliefs of others every day. Yet, I respect their right to believe as they do. If you can't follow that principle, which I live myself, you might prefer another site. As long as this thread keeps its current tone, I'll allow it to continue. Let's not drag it down. |
| salparadise Apr 17, 2006 8:10 PM EDT |
I am convinced that no thing is evil in and of itself.
Linux is a tool, like a spade or a fork is a tool. Goodness and evil are conditions of the heart and whatever is inside you is what you will see everywhere you look. To the evil man all is evil, to the good all is good.
The OSS movement has some wonderful qualities, one in particular stands out - freely sharing, this has echoes of early Christianity in it and confuses a lot of people. OSS is actually nothing like Christianity, if you want to get legal about it. God doesn't take to people changing the code (heavy warnings exist against "adding to or taking away from"). You either take it as it is or go away. Yes you can "interpret" the word and many have gone on to lead lives of hopeless misery as a result of misinterpretation, but when it comes right down to it, the Word of God is final. This is entirely unlike the Open Source movement. Often when someone gets into Linux they become quite evangelistic about it and are only too happy to tell others and "spread the word" (ever tried to get church folk into evangelism - uphill struggle or what?). (I know the answer to that one, but lxer isn't the place for such discussions). We cannot have the situation where any one faith or religion thinks itself best expressed via OSS, though all are welcome to come and behold in wonder how people are welcomed and find a role for themselves and then go on to develop in ways they never dreamed of. And all are welcome to go away and seek to motivate people in a similar way. Organisations tend to try to control things. The bigger the organisation the more control they seek to have. Once the religious get a hold of Linux we would have naming wars - no more daemons thankyou very much, Evolution - well that has to be renamed straight away - Creation Email client anyone?. Then they'd start to argue about which version of the holy book was included. Then you'd get Catholic distros and Anglican distros and happy clappy distros, and distros that spread scripture all over your screen at inappropriate times and distros that nagged you to give more away and distros that wouldn't allow you to look at anything too worldly and so on. Free and Open Source would end up being used first as a carrot and stick and then as just a stick. After all, when the Bible was printed in English (a bit like open sourcing the Word) the then church responded by burning those responsible to death. Once the Word is in a language that all can read and understand then the power that the priests held is greatly diminished. On the other hand if OSS is the method by which the church gets a reminder of sharing and holding things in common then that can't hurt at all. Though it could be argued that for the church to get a wakeup call from a bunch of happy hackers is more a sign of where the church is than a sign of where the hackers are. |
| rsheim Apr 17, 2006 8:26 PM EDT |
Quoting:Terms of Service 6. Do not place any material on our service that could be considered offensive, indecent, abusive, hateful, harassing, libelous, profane, vulgar or unlawful. Our audience tends to be professional in nature, and we have the right, but not the obligation, to remove, edit, or relocate any content that we feel violates the standards of our site. Because of the real-time nature of our forums, it is not always possible for us to remove offensive material immediately. Quoting:Discussion and debate of a political or religious nature is not allowed on the site. I read these things. I read it carefully when I sign up. I accept the terms of service and expect to find a Linux news site. But you do not offer what you say you offer. This is a deception. More and more you people want to chase the reader away. I accepted that you would not discuss religion as I find that offensive. I made one comment about Linux news and the posting person made rude and not fitting remarks. If this dcparris has taken over the site and he is a baptist minister, I guess he will preach to us. Should we go to the alter and on one knee say we accept your version of Jesus? What makes you right and everyone else not right? This is completely absurd conversation. Now, what am I a heretic? You people who run this site are frauds. |
| salparadise Apr 17, 2006 8:59 PM EDT |
Quoting:Now, what am I a heretic? Not at all, what on earth gave you that idea? Most people think tying Linux to a religion is a bad idea. All I see here is posts to that effect. If a person has any kind of belief, it tends to come out in what they say. I have to be very strong with myself at times as this site is not about politics or religion. Yet politics and religion are fairly big subjects over which people tend to feel strongly and often subjects arise which have political or spiritual angles and to not talk about them in relation to Linux can be frustrating. This thread is in response to a more or less straight Christian Linux story. Are we not allowed to discuss it? No one is forcing their views on you. This is not a Christian site, there are no spiritual membership rules. If you don't like a thread, don't read it. But don't leave! Stay and contribute. Be a voice on lxer. Say what you think without fear. |
| dcparris Apr 17, 2006 10:16 PM EDT |
rsheim: I invite you to (a) review any article I have posted on LXer or Newsforge, as well as to (b) ask anyone in any technology-related venue in which I have participated about my conduct. I also encourage you to query the editors I work with here at LXer. Some of them do not share my faith; yet we work very well together. I know for a fact you will find my conduct beyond reproach. I also invite you to point out the rude comment that was made to you on this site. I see nothing in this thread that is directed at you - or anyone else - in a rude manner. If you are uncomfortable with me, please let SalParadise or Sharkscott know. They are also editors on this site. Your accusation that we are frauds flies against the fact that Dave Whitinger and I both have established reputations for being both fair and honest. It is also a direct attack on our character. We do not allow people - myself included - to push their faith on others. Nor do we permit unwarranted attacks on people simply because they write about, or discuss, technology in the context of their faith. It probably is best to wind up this thread, as it seems to be degrading in quality. |
| jdixon Apr 18, 2006 5:32 AM EDT |
> If this dcparris has taken over the site and he is a baptist minister, I guess he will preach to us. I doubt very much he will do so. To my knowledge, he's never done so in the past. The fact that he works as a minister means that he encounters cases Linux and FOSS are (or can be) used in such work. This is an area most of us do not encounter, so it's news we wouldn't otherwise hear. This makes it a worthwhile contribution to LX'er. If you don't want to read such articles, you don't have to, and no one will complain. Whether anyone likes it or not, FOSS will be used by religious organizations. When they do so, it's no less news than when any other organization or business does. They may even alter the software to suit their needs. This is allowed by the licenses, and is the same thing other organizations do. With respect to FOSS, religous organizations are not a special case, and should not be treated as such. |
| SFN Apr 18, 2006 6:15 AM EDT |
I really don't see the beef here. As long as dcparris or anyone else doesn't start posting complaints about other religions (or any other group) using FOSS, this is a non-issue. The only thing that must be remembered is that if it can be proclaimed that Christians using FOSS is a good thing, no complaints can be made when Muslims or Buddhists or devotees of Krishna or even Satanists, Nazis and the Mob start proclaiming an affinity for FOSS. It's like the argument about Christmas Trees on the lawns of government buildings. There no reason that they can't be there - provided that Menorahs, Crescent Moons and Pentagrams can be there too. Freedom of religion is not about not allowing religion. It's about not enforcing a specific religion. Having said that, rsheim does make one good point: Quoting:Discussion and debate of a political or religious nature is not allowed on the site. It does actually say that in the TOS. Personally, I think such rules are nonsense but if they are going to be in the TOS they should be enforced across the board - not just when the discussion takes a turn that might offend some people. And having said THAT, rsheim, You are really blowing this out of proportion. You did that as well with the whole "Linux is not the same as OSS" thing. You should try to involve yourself in discussions in a more level-headed manner. Ask questions, see what people think and think twice about remarks like "you people who run this site are frauds". Making accusations as opposed to having discussions simply identify one as a troll. |
| devnet Apr 18, 2006 6:30 AM EDT |
DCParris, I suggest in the future that you refrain from using Lxer as a platform for articles of this subject matter...because whether you mean to or not, comparisons are being drawn between FOSS and religious philosophy, and in the process, alienating those that do not ascribe nor want to ascribe to anything that Christianity supports or is "in harmony" with...look at this link here: http://newsvac.newsforge.com/newsvac/05/10/11/1656231.shtml Read the final sentence of the entire article. That is something we don't need in FOSS. You're saying you don't want it to happen, but that statement says it is despite you wanting it. If you continue down this route, I'll hold you to your belief system with each step you take. Since you and other authors have brought this into my living room, I plan on holding you to it...on all issues in the present and future...For instance, what are you going to do when TC (Trusted Computing) and DRM (Digital Rights Management) items are brought up in FOSS? Will you want to ascribe Christianity to FOSS then? Probably not because if you do, you'll have to support DRM and TC as a Christian...it would be your moral obligation and you'd be ostracized in the community (for the majority) because of your support for this. In closing, I call on you to step down with this line of proselytizing (inducing others to ascribe to the belief that Christianity is 'in harmony' with FOSS) by NOT posting more articles written by you and others on this subject. Regardless if that is your intent or not...it is the result of your actions as evident by this thread and comments on the web (http://aplawrence.com/Opinion/open_source_religion.html ) Please remember that in some countries, it is ILLEGAL ( http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2004/35507.htm ) to be a Christian. What would happen if the government of that persons' country decided you were right...that Christianity is 'in harmony' with FOSS? Would you be happy to see Open Source Software outlawed because it is 'in harmony' with Christianity? Think about what you are doing...it may be something you feel morally inclined to do (further Christianity) but are you willing to do so at the expense of FOSS? If so, you'll find not many in the community support this endeavor. You can put the penguin in the pew...just don't put the pew in the penguin. |
| jimf Apr 18, 2006 6:44 AM EDT |
Don said:
Quoting:(3) Marco made no attacks on non-believers, yet was wrongly accused of attempting to hi-jack the GPL. Jimf didn't even attempt to point out what made him think the way he did. He just made an accusation without any basis for doing so. It is wrong to attack someone without cause. First note that, I have no problem in general with Don's comments or stance on this. Christians certainly have as much right as anyone to use and tout their use of Linux. My comment was an 'observation' (which apparently others share) and not meant as an 'attack' of any kind. Sorry you perceive it as such. The statements by the author about 'Christians have even more reasons than others to adopt Free Software' raised red flags for me. I agree that the whole thing has been blown out of proportion, and that's the last I'm going to say about it. |
| jdixon Apr 18, 2006 6:58 AM EDT |
> because whether you mean to or not, comparisons are being drawn between FOSS and religious philosophy, and in the process, alienating those that do not ascribe nor want to ascribe to anything that Christianity supports or is "in harmony" with... That sets and impossible standard for Christianity (note, Chrisitianity, not organized religions in general) to meet. There are no such complaints when FOSS use in other environments is discussed. I might have serious problems with the automotive insurance companies of the world. That doesn't mean I should complain when FOSS use by automotive insurers is discussed on LX'er. The only equivilant complaint I can think of was one recent one dicussing the use of FOSS in Venezuela. Someone complained that Venezuela was a communist country. It was rightly pointed out that LX'er doesn't censure FOSS news because the country in question is communist or socialist. The same should be true for religions. Again, religions in general, and Christianity in particular, are not a special case. Attempts by Christianity to misuse or hijack FOSS should be criticized. The news that Christian organizations are using it should not be. > Since you and other authors have brought this into my living room, Your computer is in your living room? Mine's in the bedroom. Seems like I'd have more reason to be upset than you do. :) Reading a particular article on LX'er is voluntary. No one is forced to do so. If you'd like discussions about the use of FOSS by religious organizations clearly marked, so that you can avoid them, that would a reasonable request. Dcparris: any chance a special category for such discussions could be created so they can be easily avoided by those they might offend? |
| devnet Apr 18, 2006 7:07 AM EDT |
"Dcparris: any chance a special category for such discussions could be created so they can be easily avoided by those they might offend?" That's the best part of your post and the best recommendation I've seen. "Attempts by Christianity to misuse or hijack FOSS should be criticized. The news that Christian organizations are using it should not be." Agreed. But News is only that...news. News is not opinion about how FOSS is sitting around a campfire singing Koombaya with Christianity. The articles I've seen on this topic posted here are NOT news. They're opinion...yet they're marked as news. I remember the first time I posted an article on my blog (editorial) here and I didn't say it was an editorial...boy did I get flamed. Hopefully, we can change this in the future for these posts with this subject matter. "Reading a particular article on LX'er is voluntary. No one is forced to do so. If you'd like discussions about the use of FOSS by religious organizations clearly marked, so that you can avoid them, that would a reasonable reques." Agreed. This is a good idea. |
| tuxtom Apr 18, 2006 7:27 AM EDT |
It seems to me that OSS has more affinity with Radical Islam/Al Qaeda, and its goal is to overthrow the Christian/Microsoft infidels that currently rule the world. Linux total world domination...isn't that the mantra of LXER? We are OS insurgents. That analogy makes more sense to me in the context of the article and this thread. |
| tuxchick2 Apr 18, 2006 7:39 AM EDT |
Is this a joke? What the heck is wrong with you people, and I mean devnet and rsheim, LXer's shiny new troll? If you don't like an article, DON'T READ IT. If your tender sensibilities cannot bear the presence of certain words or ideas, avoid them. Elvis in an Oldsmobile, the world already is over-populated with disapproving pursey-lipped officious enforcers of The Rulez. Yeah, you can quote the TOS all day, and you won't even have the honesty to admit that you only pay attention to it when you want support for some opinions that you're against. Hypocrisy, anyone? (The TOS is a joke anyway- what is LXer but a political site?) Do us all a favor and take your "yes buts" somewhere else. Especially you, rsheim. You do nothing but carp, complain, and criticize- why are you even here? You're like the dope I saw whining in the buffet because there were foods present he didn't want. That old "don't say these things because it reflects badly on FOSS" argument is bogus. How about we just drop that one for good? Let the M$ astroturfers and shills have it. FWIW, I am not a Christian, and would take offense at being called one. It's the hypocrisy and trolling that drives my blood pressure up. Don, I hope you won't restrict your future articles or comments in any way, and you certainly don't need to restrict anything to some little LXer ghetto just to avoid possibly offending someone. |
| SFN Apr 18, 2006 7:47 AM EDT |
Quoting:Elvis in an Oldsmobile ¿Qué? |
| jimf Apr 18, 2006 8:47 AM EDT |
lol... Elvis always drove caddys... to say otherwise is sacrilege :D . |
| SFN Apr 18, 2006 8:49 AM EDT |
Ahh, OK. My mind is an Elvis-free zone. |
| number6x Apr 18, 2006 8:59 AM EDT |
caddys and race cars. |
| Scott_Ruecker Apr 18, 2006 9:09 AM EDT |
and toilets too, 'cause I remember what he was driving when he died. ;-) |
| dcparris Apr 18, 2006 9:34 AM EDT |
To all:
Articles and discussion of technology in the context of a religious organization is perfectly acceptable - regardless of the particular faith involved. Turning such discussions into religious debates is not. There is no need to create special forums, etc. Just choose what you read and post wisely. If you're not mature enough to do that, you should consider another forum. Jimf: Thanks for pointing out what drew your comments. That certainly helps my understanding, and makes your post seem less like an ad hominem attack. You should understand that any religious (or even political, etc.) group is likely to feel that way - mostly because they have a belief system with which to identify, rather than because they want to "hi-jack" the GPL. ;-) I respect their freedom to believe that way. In fact, I would be very afraid of someone who didn't feel their belief system was "the best" or whatever. Just respect mine, and I'll respect yours. My message throughout has been (essentially) live and let live. When Marco (or your favorite target of the day) comes over here with his sword to offer faith or death, I'll stand beside you because I know no one has a right to force his views on you. Not that he would, but just in case. :-) Until then we must be tolerant of each other. LXer is not changing policy on the posting of articles or comments. |
| devnet Apr 18, 2006 10:56 AM EDT |
tuxtom, Actually, you're right on that comparison. Never thought of it that way...but it does have a ton of similarities. Tuxchick, I'm actually concerned for FOSS and don't care about myself, nor my readings here at Lxer. I can skip the articles I don't like and often do. Nerves get smacked with religion tough, especially Christianity. Hence, my comments. If I upset anyone, I apologize. I'll leave you with my last thoughts on this subject... 1. It has been blown out of proportion. However, it has hit the nervers of readers. Consider this when posting and writing in the future about FOSS. 2. It is my opinion that rsheim is right. Why? Because he is the "customer" and he perceives there is a problem. Since this is his perception and it is real...then it needs to be addressed...I don't think everyone is a fraud, just that the rules he is quoting are valid and if he feels they were overstepped, a closer look needs to be taken at what those rules mean. If I operated my business with a "just ignore what you don't like" mentality, I'd be out of business. rsheim, if no one else here apologizes for this. I apologize for them. You pulled the rules in plain English and tried to preserve them. Ignoring them would be hypocrisy. 3. Posting on this subject will always attract the same debate...if not from those currently discussing this, it will from others. 4. You can put the penguin in the pew...just don't put the pew in the penguin. |
| SFN Apr 18, 2006 11:10 AM EDT |
Quoting:Posting on this subject will always attract the same debate...if not from those currently discussing this, it will from others. This is definitely accurate. While this doesn't mean that - in this case - religion shouldn't be brought up, it does mean you can't reasonably expect some people to not get upset. If you want to stir the excrement, don't complain about the stench. |
| dcparris Apr 18, 2006 11:51 AM EDT |
I publicly offered rsheim a means by which to bring his complaint to me, or to another LXer editor, if he was not comfortable discussing his complaint with me. I know another editor has approached him with an opportunity to discuss the issue further. To my knowledge, he has not responded to either invitation. It is still open. In reality, debate on these issues is very important. Jimf's original post makes much more sense in light of his more recent post. It is much easier to respond to that than to his original post. The fact is that some religious groups do and will find affinities between FOSS and their beliefs. As long as they respect the freedom/rights of others, that's fine, and should be celebrated. If they attempted to withhold FOSS from the rest of the world, or even attempted to impose it on everyone, that would be problematic. While I am at it, I should have taken the opportunity to ask Jimf why he felt the way he did, rather than assume he was making an ad hominem attack. Especially so, since I knew he understands the difference between proselytizing and articles about technology in the context of a religious organization. I will try not to make myself look so foolish in the future. Jimf, I hope you'll find it within yourself to forgive me. |
| SFN Apr 18, 2006 12:07 PM EDT |
I thought you handled it just fine, dcparris. There will always be rsheim's. |
| tuxchick2 Apr 18, 2006 12:23 PM EDT |
Devnet, much of the time you're right on. In this instance you're not. As you say "I'm actually concerned for FOSS and don't care about myself..." Remember what the F stands for? (any answer that starts with "yes but" is disqualified) " 2... the rules he is quoting are valid and if he feels they were overstepped, a closer look needs to be taken at what those rules mean." I agree that the TOS is not consistent with what is published on LXer. "3. Posting on this subject will always attract the same debate...if not from those currently discussing this, it will from others." It's a sad day when religious intolerance enters the FOSS world. Not that it's perfect, but this knee-jerk aversion to the mention of religion, and saying that talking about it is the same as forcing it on people, is all goofy. The GPL and the FSF are fundamentally about values and morals, so any discussion of values and morals is completely in keeping with talking about Free Software. |
| jimf Apr 18, 2006 12:23 PM EDT |
Nothing to forgive Don :) I should have clarified earlier. |
| dcparris Apr 18, 2006 1:34 PM EDT |
SFN: I appreciate your encouragement. I'm sure I'll have more such opportunities in the future. ;-) |
| dcparris Apr 18, 2006 3:37 PM EDT |
Jimf: Thanks for understanding and for helping me to understand you better as well. |
| dinotrac Apr 18, 2006 11:56 PM EDT |
GO GO GO GO TUXCHICK !!!!! SIS BOOM BAH AND RAH RAH RAH!!! Five stars and a brownie point besides. Long lost Carla, I know that you and I don't see eye to eye on every bye and bye, but on this the five is high: Real freedom and tolerance is not restricted to the freedom to shut up so that you or I will be unoffended. That, in fact, is the epitome of intolerance. Understanding is not advanced by the unspoken thought. Unexpected alliances and areas and interests are not discovered by turning away. You give as good as you get, girl. That, I think is the point. Giving AND getting. |
| tuxchick2 Apr 19, 2006 7:36 AM EDT |
hey dino, nice to see you. Sometimes life bites, sometimes I try biting it back.:) I think I'm gaining ground. 'Understanding is not advanced by the unspoken thought.' Indeed. As long as folks are talking, we can figure it out. |
| dinotrac Apr 19, 2006 5:00 PM EDT |
Tuxchick -- Nice to see you back around, too. Sorry for the silence after the am posts...but daughter's birthday gift (on hold since her real birthday on Valentine's day) was a daddy-daughter date day. We went into Chicago on the train, saw Millenium Park (including the amazing bean), went to Wicked (Ouch!!! $35 t shirts -- but how do you look into a ten year old face that is just brimming with daddy love and say no? -- walking around town and having a good time. For that, I can leave posting behind for a day. |
| rsheim Apr 19, 2006 6:26 PM EDT |
Quoting:Is this a joke? What the heck is wrong with you people, and I mean devnet and rsheim, LXer's shiny new troll? I looked this word up in the Internet jargon. A troll is a user of a newsgroup, forum or message board that posts messages with the intent of inciting an argument or flame-war. I looked the meanings up also. It seems that I should not visit this site further. I can only see that you do not want new readers or people who express their opinion as in discussions sense. You can say that your terms of service should change. That's seems convenient. In the interim time, you represent a product/service and one could say that it does not meet the new user's expectation. So, you maybe should change it to fit the actual situation one will find. With regard to the quote, you seem intending to hurt someones feelings and so obviously, you do not want new readers. You should indicate that in your registration program. "We do not want readers, beware because you will achieve insults. Also, you will not receive service we state." I have found it enlightenment. German Linux sites lack much good content. Other sites advertise for Microsoft, not very popular in Europe at the moment. So, I had hoped this would provide a cure. "You people " is a derogatory term in many other cultures and demeaning. My job for your information involves deploying Debian clusters in Germany for governments. I travel in the AME. I cannot recommend this site for others. |
| dcparris Apr 19, 2006 9:41 PM EDT |
rsheim: I offered to work with you to resolve your complaint(s). Since you have rejected my offer, it seems there is little recourse beyond your decision to leave. I wish you all the best, whatever you decide in the end. As for the charge that you might be a troll, consider this: >If this dcparris has taken over the site and he is a baptist minister, I guess he will preach to us. Should we go to the alter and on one knee say we accept your version of Jesus? What makes you right and everyone else not right? I had made no effort in this thread to "preach" up to this point. Nor had I said anything generally, or directly to you that should have led you to accuse me of such a thing. Your remark was both inflamatory (trollish) and unfair. Even so, I made an effort to help you resolve what you saw as rudeness toward you. What more must I do? The fact is that all of us are human and apt to "miss the mark". Hence, I was man enough to ask jimf's forgiveness when I realized I had assumed something about him I shouldn't have. It seems you and I share that much in common. Perhaps you could simply admit that you're not so perfect either, and join the crowd. You are welcome to stay here at LXer. You are also free to leave. It's up to you. |
| tuxtom Apr 21, 2006 5:29 PM EDT |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!