Re: Code of conduct reminder.

On Wed, 21 Jun 2023 20:43:46 + Andy Smith wrote: > Hello, > > On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 05:52:20PM +0200, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 10:18:18AM -0400, David Peacock wrote: > > > I'm seeing a shocking and disappointing amount of disrespect and > > > vulgarity of late fr

Re: Code of conduct reminder.

On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 4:51 PM Andy Smith wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 06:52:57PM +, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote: > > Could we please finish the package managers thread at this point? > > Do you include in that the sub-thread of that where the OP is > (still) attempting to get Synaptic to w

Re: Code of conduct reminder.

Hello, On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 06:52:57PM +, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote: > Could we please finish the package managers thread at this point? Do you include in that the sub-thread of that where the OP is (still) attempting to get Synaptic to work, and also the sub-threads this generates as the OP

Re: Code of conduct reminder.

Hello, On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 05:52:20PM +0200, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 10:18:18AM -0400, David Peacock wrote: > > I'm seeing a shocking and disappointing amount of disrespect and vulgarity > > of late from several parties. If there is no active moderation possible, > >

Re: Code of conduct reminder.

On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 10:18:18AM -0400, David Peacock wrote: > Hi folks, > > Just a friendly reminder of the code of conduct that we agree to be bound > by when we participate in this list, pasted below for convenience, but > originally from here [0]. > As a semi-moderator of the list and the

Re: Code of conduct reminder.

On 21 Jun 2023 17:52, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: Since "shocking", "disrespect" and "vulgarity" are pretty subjective measures (they are still very legitimate, though), it would be nice and constructive if you gave people the chance to understand what you are taking issue with. Otherwise, we have n

Re: Code of conduct reminder.

On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 10:18:18AM -0400, David Peacock wrote: > Hi folks, > > Just a friendly reminder of the code of conduct that we agree to be bound > by when we participate in this list, pasted below for convenience, but > originally from here [0]. No need to quote the thing in full. It gets

Re: [CODE OF CONDUCT REMINDER - WAS Re: Re: Why did Norbert Preining (having maintained KDE) left Debian?]

On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 09:50:45AM -0800, RP wrote: > > > This whole thread has turned into a violation of the very first rule.  By that, I presume you are referring to "The mailing lists exist to foster the development and use of Debian. Non-constructive or off-topic messages, along with other

Re: [CODE OF CONDUCT REMINDER - WAS Re: Re: Why did Norbert Preining (having maintained KDE) left Debian?]

On 2022-01-24 12:50, RP wrote: > On 1/24/22 09:33, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote: >> On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 04:55:25PM +, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote: >>> On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 12:44:52PM +0100, deloptes wrote: max wrote: > For comparison, RMS is publicly against singular "they", and

Re: [CODE OF CONDUCT REMINDER - WAS Re: Re: Why did Norbert Preining (having maintained KDE) left Debian?]

On 1/24/22 09:33, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote: On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 04:55:25PM +, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote: On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 12:44:52PM +0100, deloptes wrote: max wrote: For comparison, RMS is publicly against singular "they", and Debian developers voted not to censure him. https://

Re: [CODE OF CONDUCT REMINDER - WAS Re: Re: Why did Norbert Preining (having maintained KDE) left Debian?]

On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 04:55:25PM +, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote: > On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 12:44:52PM +0100, deloptes wrote: > > max wrote: > > > > > For comparison, RMS is publicly against singular "they", and Debian > > > developers voted not to censure him. > > > https://stallman.org/articles

Re: Code Of Conduct (was ... Re: Security?)

On 9/28/2013 9:06 AM, Chris Bannister wrote: On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 03:15:57PM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote: So is it ok to post such a link? It does say that swearing is illegal on packet radio, which some people use to "read" the ML. *** In the United States ***. Ths U.S. is not the whole

Re: Code Of Conduct (was ... Re: Security?)

On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 03:15:57PM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > > So is it ok to post such a link? It does say that swearing is illegal on packet radio, which some people use to "read" the ML. So understanding that, and also that swearing is unnecesary on a support ML, I'd say you have your answ

Re: Code Of Conduct (was ... Re: Security?)

On Monday 23 September 2013 15:39:05 David Guntner wrote: > Yea.  You and a couple of other people found it interesting and > kept the topic dragging on.  It doesn't change the fact that it was > OFF TOPIC for THIS PARTICULAR MAILING LIST. Why doesn't everyone just ignore him? Or if you can't do

Re: Code Of Conduct (was ... Re: Security?)

On Mon, 2013-09-23 at 07:27 -0700, David Guntner wrote: > Posting a link is one thing, quoting from it is another. That's clear, the question is at what point the link becomes an issue. No doubt about it, a link to racist content on this list is offending the CoC, a link to a discussion about a v

Re: Code Of Conduct

Does the obvious pronunciation of the acronym for Code of Conduct, CoC, violate the Code of Conduct? ;-) -- hangout: ##b0rked on irc.freenode.net diversion: http://alienjeff.net - visit The Fringe quote: "The foundation of authority is based upon the consent of the people." - Thomas Hooker --

Re: Code Of Conduct (was ... Re: Security?)

Ralf Mardorf grabbed a keyboard and wrote: > "Assumed I would post a link, is it ok to post a link with similar > content? Perhaps interesting for the one who posted the link too." > > I'm not kidding. The link was useful for the topic and I quoted from The "topic" has been *off* topic for this p

Re: Code Of Conduct (was ... Re: Security?)

Well, now you got me going. The year is 2012 and contrary to your recent discovery of an alternative to a windows platform -- for some of the rest of us -- it has been almost 35 years since Kerrigan published his how to program in C book and the last thing we are quite bored of revisiting the past.

Re: Code Of Conduct (was ... Re: Security?)

On Mon, 2013-09-23 at 15:15 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > I don't think the videos are "censored", resp. taken away by a > collecting society. If the collecting societies ban a video, than there > is information about it and this is the only "censorship" done in > Germany. Nazi content etc. isn't al

Re: Code Of Conduct (was ... Re: Security?)

My question about the link is www.family.friendly.web.page.link.name.nowhere with a discussion about security that contains swearing. It's clear that if such a link would contain a porn video, I'm not allowed to post it, but it's about the topic and not all words are family friendly. So is it ok

Re: Code Of Conduct (was ... Re: Security?)

On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 01:45:37PM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > On Mon, 2013-09-23 at 23:31 +1200, Chris Bannister wrote: > I still miss an answer, if it's allowed to post such links, that contain > words as the unwanted word I quoted from the link. I suggest to censor them ... i.e. bas%#@d, f@&

Security? (was ... Re: Code Of Conduct (was ... Re: Security?))

On Mon, 2013-09-23 at 13:43 +0100, Brian wrote: > [Extensive, selective snipping of the original post has taken place. > This mail will also be my one and only one on this topic]. > > > On Mon 23 Sep 2013 at 12:47:52 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > > > It also would be nice to be professional . . .

Re: Code Of Conduct (was ... Re: Security?)

[Extensive, selective snipping of the original post has taken place. This mail will also be my one and only one on this topic]. On Mon 23 Sep 2013 at 12:47:52 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > It also would be nice to be professional . . . . . On Sunday 8th Sept 2013 at 11:27:36 -0700 lati...@vcn.bc

Re: Code Of Conduct (was ... Re: Security?)

On Mon, 2013-09-23 at 23:31 +1200, Chris Bannister wrote: > If you don't want to abide by the CoC [snip] I never claimed that. I only explained that it was a mistake, because this word isn't a hard word here. I was thinking about not to use the word, because I wasn't sure if it is considered as ev

Re: Code Of Conduct (was ... Re: Security?)

On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 11:13:37AM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > On Mon, 2013-09-23 at 18:56 +1200, Chris Bannister wrote: > > On Sat, Sep 21, 2013 at 09:33:26PM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > > > Btw. "fxg a sheep" in Germany is allowed, so claiming asylum should > > > > http://www.debian.org/Ma

Re: Code Of Conduct (was ... Re: Security?)

On Mon, 2013-09-23 at 07:03 -0400, Jeff Bauer wrote: > On 09/23/2013 06:47 AM, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > > > A quick archive search does show that I helped others on this list > > much more than you did. > > List participation is not a competitive sport. That's correct, but I randomly, without evil

Re: Code Of Conduct (was ... Re: Security?)

On Mon, 2013-09-23 at 06:33 -0400, Darko Gavrilovic wrote: [snip] My apologies, I forgot to mention that 4 from your 4 mails are sent HTML formatted and 2 from your 4 mails used top-posting. https://wiki.debian.org/DebianMailingLists Please post only in plain text. Do not submit HTML, h4x0r or sp

Re: Code Of Conduct (was ... Re: Security?)

On 09/23/2013 06:47 AM, Ralf Mardorf wrote: A quick archive search does show that I helped others on this list much more than you did. List participation is not a competitive sport. -- hangout: ##b0rked on irc.freenode.net diversion: http://alienjeff.net - visit The Fringe quote: "The foundat

Re: Code Of Conduct (was ... Re: Security?)

On Mon, 2013-09-23 at 06:33 -0400, Darko Gavrilovic wrote something that offended netiquette ;), no hard feelings. Btw. as far as I can see you send 4 mails to the list and 3 mails were send to the list and to the person you replied to, no rant, just an information: Reply to the list only! And con

Re: Code Of Conduct (was ... Re: Security?)

On Mon, 2013-09-23 at 06:33 -0400, Darko Gavrilovic wrote: > No one on here cares about your rant or definition of what foul > language is in the little village you happen to reside in on this > planet. Just keep your posts about Debian, useful to the user > community, and keep it professional. It

Re: Code Of Conduct (was ... Re: Security?)

On Sep 23, 2013 5:14 AM, "Ralf Mardorf" wrote: > > On Mon, 2013-09-23 at 18:56 +1200, Chris Bannister wrote: > > On Sat, Sep 21, 2013 at 09:33:26PM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > > > Btw. "fxg a sheep" in Germany is allowed, so claiming asylum should > > > > http://www.debian.org/MailingLists/#c

Re: Code Of Conduct (was ... Re: Security?)

PS: FWIW it's a quote from the link below. The used word has got a German equivalent. It's not sophisticated to use this word in Germany, but it's also not the worst kind of language of the gutter. It's common that nearly everybody does use it. It's very uncommon to use a sophisticated word instead

Re: Code Of Conduct (was ... Re: Security?)

On Mon, 2013-09-23 at 18:56 +1200, Chris Bannister wrote: > On Sat, Sep 21, 2013 at 09:33:26PM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > > Btw. "fxg a sheep" in Germany is allowed, so claiming asylum should > > http://www.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct > > * Do not use foul language; besides, so

Re: code of conduct (was Re: Another OT: GRUB location on Dual-Boot with TWO hard drives)

On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 9:35 AM, Jon Dowland wrote: > On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 12:53:59PM -0400, Wally Lepore wrote: > > I understand. Thank you for correcting my humble mistake. Will comply. > > You're welcome - and whilst I'm at it, welcome to the list! I hope you > find it > useful. > Thank yo

Re: code of conduct (was Re: Another OT: GRUB location on Dual-Boot with TWO hard drives)

On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 12:53:59PM -0400, Wally Lepore wrote: > I understand. Thank you for correcting my humbly mistake. Will comply. You're welcome - and whilst I'm at it, welcome to the list! I hope you find it useful. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a

Re: code of conduct (was Re: Another OT: GRUB location on Dual-Boot with TWO hard drives)

On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Wally Lepore wrote: > On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Jon Dowland wrote: >> >> When communicating on a Debian mailing list, please direct your emails at >> the list address and do not CC the participants explicitly. For this and >> other >> rules, please see t

Re: code of conduct (was Re: Another OT: GRUB location on Dual-Boot with TWO hard drives)

On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Jon Dowland wrote: > Hi Wally, > > When communicating on a Debian mailing list, please direct your emails at > the list address and do not CC the participants explicitly. For this and other > rules, please see the Code of Conduct at >

Re: Code of conduct (was ... Re: need help on using ffmpeg for video grab)

On Wed, 23 May 2012 00:24:37 +1200, Chris wrote in message <20120522122437.GC25963@tal>: > On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 12:48:49PM +0300, Andrei POPESCU wrote: > > On Ma, 22 mai 12, 02:49:23, Chris Bannister wrote: > > > > > > Sorry, I don't see it that way. I don't see debian-user as > > > the first

Re: Code of conduct (was ... Re: need help on using ffmpeg for video grab)

On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 12:48:49PM +0300, Andrei POPESCU wrote: > On Ma, 22 mai 12, 02:49:23, Chris Bannister wrote: > > > > Sorry, I don't see it that way. I don't see debian-user as the first > > "port of call" and if you don't get any help ***THEN*** google and try > > to find out where the ***

Re: Code of conduct (was ... Re: need help on using ffmpeg for video grab)

On Ma, 22 mai 12, 02:49:23, Chris Bannister wrote: > > Sorry, I don't see it that way. I don't see debian-user as the first > "port of call" and if you don't get any help ***THEN*** google and try > to find out where the ***ACTUAL*** place to get support is. IMVHO it is entirely apropiate for som

Re: Code of conduct (was ... Re: need help on using ffmpeg for video grab)

On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 12:09 PM, Camaleón wrote: > > What question? General questions about how to use a program (program → > mutt, ffmpeg, gnome-terminal or whatever package you can get from Debian > repositories or elsewhere)? > > Those questions do fit here. Period. You are free to reply them

Re: Code of conduct (was ... Re: need help on using ffmpeg for video grab)

On Tue, 22 May 2012 02:49:23 +1200, Chris Bannister wrote: > On Sun, May 20, 2012 at 03:36:10PM +, Camaleón wrote: >> On Mon, 21 May 2012 02:49:34 +1200, Chris Bannister wrote: point >> because if so, we have to stop accepting posts asking how does Mutt >> work ... > > Good luck with answerin

Re: *plonk* Re: Code of Conduct (was Re: Totally [OT] Re: Opium)

On November 20, 2003 at 8:50PM -0800, "Karsten M. Self" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > on Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 04:49:14AM +, ben ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 13:23:48 +0800 > > csj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 19:54:17 -0800, > > > Karsten M. Se

Re: *plonk* Re: Code of Conduct (was Re: Totally [OT] Re: Opium)

On November 21, 2003 at 7:27PM +0800, "David Palmer." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 09:24:16 + > ben <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Thu, 20 Nov 2003 20:50:09 -0800 > > "Karsten M. Self" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > on Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 04:49:14AM +, ben

Re: *plonk* Re: Code of Conduct (was Re: Totally [OT] Re: Opium)

On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 09:24:16 + ben <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, 20 Nov 2003 20:50:09 -0800 > "Karsten M. Self" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > on Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 04:49:14AM +, ben ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) > > wrote: > > > On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 13:23:48 +0800 > > > csj <[EMAIL PROTE

Re: *plonk* Re: Code of Conduct (was Re: Totally [OT] Re: Opium)

on Fri, Nov 21, 2003 at 09:24:16AM +, ben ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > On Thu, 20 Nov 2003 20:50:09 -0800 "Karsten M. Self" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > on Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 04:49:14AM +, ben ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) > > wrote: > yeah, i was one of those to whose addresses you felt yours

Re: *plonk* Re: Code of Conduct (was Re: Totally [OT] Re: Opium)

On Thu, 20 Nov 2003 20:50:09 -0800 "Karsten M. Self" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > on Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 04:49:14AM +, ben ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) > wrote: > > On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 13:23:48 +0800 > > csj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 19:54:17 -0800, > > > Karsten M. Sel

Re: *plonk* Re: Code of Conduct (was Re: Totally [OT] Re: Opium)

Mr. Folkert has a grudge against me from another forum in which a rather flagrently explosive fest of fabrication of history and rules, failure to stand by prior statements, gross personal abuse, spinelessness in standing up for justice (with few exceptions), and violation of personal confidences,

Re: *plonk* Re: Code of Conduct (was Re: Totally [OT] Re: Opium)

On Thu, 2003-11-20 at 23:50, Karsten M. Self wrote: > on Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 04:49:14AM +, ben ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 13:23:48 +0800 > > csj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 19:54:17 -0800, > > > Karsten M. Self wrote: > > > > > > > > on Tu

Re: *plonk* Re: Code of Conduct (was Re: Totally [OT] Re: Opium)

on Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 04:49:14AM +, ben ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 13:23:48 +0800 > csj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 19:54:17 -0800, > > Karsten M. Self wrote: > > > > > > on Tue, Nov 18, 2003 at 09:19:48AM +0800, csj ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:

Re: *plonk* Re: Code of Conduct (was Re: Totally [OT] Re: Opium)

On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 04:49:14 +, ben wrote: > > On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 13:23:48 +0800 > csj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 19:54:17 -0800, > > Karsten M. Self wrote: > > > > > > on Tue, Nov 18, 2003 at 09:19:48AM +0800, csj ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > > > On Mon, 17 Nov

Re: *plonk* Re: Code of Conduct (was Re: Totally [OT] Re: Opium)

On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 13:23:48 +0800 csj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 19:54:17 -0800, > Karsten M. Self wrote: > > > > on Tue, Nov 18, 2003 at 09:19:48AM +0800, csj ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > > On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 08:48:14 -0800, > > > Karsten M. Self wrote: > > > > > > [..

Re: *plonk* Re: Code of Conduct (was Re: Totally [OT] Re: Opium)

On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 15:27:44 -0500, Wayne Topa wrote: > > csj([EMAIL PROTECTED]) is reported to have said: > > On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 19:54:17 -0800, > > Karsten M. Self wrote: > > > > > > on Tue, Nov 18, 2003 at 09:19:48AM +0800, csj ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > > > On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 08:48:14 -

Re: *plonk* Re: Code of Conduct (was Re: Totally [OT] Re: Opium)

csj([EMAIL PROTECTED]) is reported to have said: > On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 19:54:17 -0800, > Karsten M. Self wrote: > > > > on Tue, Nov 18, 2003 at 09:19:48AM +0800, csj ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > > On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 08:48:14 -0800, > > > Karsten M. Self wrote: > > > > > > [...] > > > > > > >

Re: *plonk* Re: Code of Conduct (was Re: Totally [OT] Re: Opium)

On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 19:54:17 -0800, Karsten M. Self wrote: > > on Tue, Nov 18, 2003 at 09:19:48AM +0800, csj ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 08:48:14 -0800, > > Karsten M. Self wrote: > > > > [...] > > > > > As several (in or out of the) closet anarchists have replied > > > th

*plonk* Re: Code of Conduct (was Re: Totally [OT] Re: Opium)

on Tue, Nov 18, 2003 at 09:19:48AM +0800, csj ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 08:48:14 -0800, > Karsten M. Self wrote: > > [...] > > > As several (in or out of the) closet anarchists have replied > > that self-control is apparently beyond their mein, I'll remind > > them that con

Re: Code of Conduct (was Re: Totally [OT] Re: Opium)

On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 08:48:14 -0800, Karsten M. Self wrote: [...] > As several (in or out of the) closet anarchists have replied > that self-control is apparently beyond their mein, I'll remind > them that consequences for actions are also their > responsibility. Including finding themselves igno