bug#38002: Please remove this joke

bug#38002: Please remove this joke

[Cecilio Pardo]

Severity: wishlist
Tags: patch

Thanks for considering the removal of this joke.


diff --git a/etc/DEVEL.HUMOR b/etc/DEVEL.HUMOR
index 58b6cb323a..6db69bb4b5 100644
--- a/etc/DEVEL.HUMOR
+++ b/etc/DEVEL.HUMOR
@@ -126,20 +126,6 @@ course we all know that Emacs was there before Word, but this might
 have escaped John's notice."
                                              -- David Kastrup and RMS
 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-
-Re: patch for woman (woman-topic-at-point)
-
-  "Sorry for the long message.  I wanted to make the problem clear
-also for people not familiar with 'woman'."
-  "Most hackers, I take?
-   For a moment there I thought you had a patch that you could put on
-a woman, and it would make her come right to the topic at point
-without attempting any course of action that requires an advance
-course in divination.
-   There'd be quite a sensational market for that, you know."
-                                    -- Emilio Lopes and David Kastrup
-
 ----------------------------------------------------------------------
 
   "[T]here may be a good reason since the code explicitly checks for



-- 
Cecilio Pardo

bug#38002: Please remove this joke

[Stefan Kangas]

Cecilio Pardo <cpardo@imayhem.com> writes:
> Thanks for considering the removal of this joke.

Thanks for reporting this.  I agree that this joke should be removed.

Best regards,
Stefan Kangas

bug#38002: Please remove this joke

[Marcin Borkowski]

On 2019-10-31, at 16:46, Stefan Kangas <stefan@marxist.se> wrote:

> Cecilio Pardo <cpardo@imayhem.com> writes:
>> Thanks for considering the removal of this joke.
>
> Thanks for reporting this.  I agree that this joke should be removed.

Well, I don't understand that.  I always thought that hackers are
(almost by definition) intelligent, and they should also have some sense
of humor.  Why should they remove a cute self-deprecating joke?

FWIW, I like this joke a lot.

Best,

--
Marcin Borkowski
http://mbork.pl

bug#38002: Please remove this joke

[Lars Ingebrigtsen]

Stefan Kangas <stefan@marxist.se> writes:

> Cecilio Pardo <cpardo@imayhem.com> writes:
>> Thanks for considering the removal of this joke.
>
> Thanks for reporting this.  I agree that this joke should be removed.

Me too.

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
   bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no

bug#38002: Please remove this joke

[Glenn Morris]

I would remove the whole file, which is basically "a few things that
amused someone over a decade ago".

bug#38002: Please remove this joke

[Robert Pluim]

>>>>> On Thu, 31 Oct 2019 17:22:20 +0100, Marcin Borkowski <mbork@mbork.pl> said:

    Marcin> On 2019-10-31, at 16:46, Stefan Kangas <stefan@marxist.se> wrote:

    >> Cecilio Pardo <cpardo@imayhem.com> writes:
    >>> Thanks for considering the removal of this joke.
    >> 
    >> Thanks for reporting this.  I agree that this joke should be removed.

    Marcin> Well, I don't understand that.  I always thought that hackers are
    Marcin> (almost by definition) intelligent, and they should also have some sense
    Marcin> of humor.  Why should they remove a cute self-deprecating joke?

The first half of the joke is self-deprecating. The second half is
not. I vote for removal.

Robert

bug#38002: Please remove this joke

[Juanma Barranquero]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 226 bytes --]

On Thu, Oct 31, 2019 at 8:25 PM Glenn Morris <rgm@gnu.org> wrote:

> I would remove the whole file, which is basically "a few things that
> amused someone over a decade ago".

Same for etc/JOKES and etc/future-bug, I suppose.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 348 bytes --]

bug#38002: Please remove this joke

[nipponpost]

The joke should not be removed. Men wrote the code, men get to make 
jokes regarding their code and lifestyle.

Women did NOT create the free software movement. Instead (american) 
women are trying to /tear/ it down because "the slaves are not following 
our speech codes/

(Note: American men are grouped in the set [(american) women], since 
American men lack agency and are simply automatons that follow the will 
of the american woman.)

On 2019-10-31 23:12, Juanma Barranquero wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 31, 2019 at 8:25 PM Glenn Morris <rgm@gnu.org> wrote:
> 
>> I would remove the whole file, which is basically "a few things that
>> amused someone over a decade ago".
> 
> Same for etc/JOKES and etc/future-bug, I suppose.

bug#38002: Please remove this joke

[Richard Stallman]

[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]

I'm in favor of deleting it.  We should not include jokes that put
anyone down.


-- 
Dr Richard Stallman
Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://gnu.org, https://fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)

bug#38002: Please remove this joke

[Lars Ingebrigtsen]

Cecilio Pardo <cpardo@imayhem.com> writes:

> Thanks for considering the removal of this joke.

Thanks for the patch; applied to Emacs 27.

There was also some discussion about removing the jokes files
altogether, but that's a separate issue, so I'm closing this bug report.

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
   bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no

bug#38002: Please remove this joke

[Filipp Gunbin]

On 01/11/2019 00:12 +0100, Juanma Barranquero wrote:

> On Thu, Oct 31, 2019 at 8:25 PM Glenn Morris <rgm@gnu.org> wrote:
>
>> I would remove the whole file, which is basically "a few things that
>> amused someone over a decade ago".
>
> Same for etc/JOKES and etc/future-bug, I suppose.

Please don't remove /etc/JOKES.

bug#38002: Please remove this joke

[Richard Stallman]

[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]

There is nothing wrong with jokes in general, and no valid reason in
general to delete jokes in the Emacs distribution.  If you think there
is something bad about a particular joke, please suggest deleting that
specific joke and give the specific reason.

-- 
Dr Richard Stallman
Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://gnu.org, https://fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)

bug#38002: Please remove this joke

[nipponpost]

Deleting any jokes (including the one you're acquiescent to removal), 
after accepting the persons work (the code that came along with the 
joke) is extremely disrespectful to the person who did the programming 
work along-side it.

(And I mean /that/ person, including a time-period element (people 
change, sadly, they're always better when they're younger: when they're 
old they simply give up and obey).)

It is like tearing their essence out of the program, their joys, their 
perspective. It is treating them as a mule.

Just like proprietary companies threat their programming m[a|u]les.

It also erases the history of the program, the men behind it, their 
time-period. With the joke and all the rest you can remenice and 
remember /THAT/ time and even the day when the commit was added, and 
interacting with the person. This is like kicking over their gravestone 
and is /effectivly/ deleting them from the history of the program (the 
Authors list does /not/ give you context regarding who they were: just 
gives their names, which is useless, especially since everyone uses the 
same handful of first names, and the last names aren't too varied either 
(usually it's just a job title from their family's past peasant or 
mercantile work)).

Let me suggest this: When it came time to have family names, the losely 
Confederated central-european states gave some people cruel jokes of a 
family name: "gold water" (piss water) etc.

They kept the names anyway when they came to America and could change 
them. Yet you can't keep the joke because a woman is offended? The women 
are /more important/ than the /men/ who /actually/ helped you guys?

EMACS is old, like many of you are now. Would you like your history 
erased because a woman was offended?

Also: in the USA after 35 years an author, or his estate, can recover 
his copyrights on whatever works he produced, regardless of who he 
assigned the copyright to, within a window of time.

If I were one of the men who's jokes were being removed I would do 
exactly that (these sound like 1980s jokes... even 1970s ones). Then 
when the code was reimplemented I would sue for contributory copyright 
infringement. That's just me though.

Then you would have to make the real choices:
US Copyright Law OR Free Software as your basic creed.
Men OR Women as your programmers.

I will tell you: while you grasp at women and obey their speech codes, 
and bend us to /their/ will: you lose the flock of gulls in your hand.

If we liked them we would not waste our lives programming: we would 
chase the women. There is a reason we have the time to do the free 
software programing and media creation. The fact is we tacitly reject 
them because they are tyrants (they would say they rejected us: just as 
they attacked you, RMS, in the past saying you would "never get laid" 
when you asked them to stop sending birth announcements to the list), 
slave drivers, and banned everything we /actually/ wanted (marrying 
/girls/ not /women/).

They demand a joke written by a programmer be removed from the program. 
What do they offer? Nothing. They offer nothing in payment for the 
erasure of the man's mark. They certainly offer nothing to said man.

I know, in the end, it's your program, RMS (and the other original 
programmers of emacs in the 70s, you being one of them, this being a 
continuation-in-kind, grown from a clone). But you accepted these men's 
code, and their joke. Now we watch as "maintainers" and women disrespect 
the programmers, and attack you (trying to oust you), and you agree with 
them and go along with them. So we silently walk away.

What do you even gain from it? The women and their supporters had you 
thrown out of MIT, tossed out of the FSF, and do you have a very young 
bride or two that's adorable? No you don't have that either. You got 
nothing for it. It would be better to move the free software movement to 
Jordan. Even Russia would be a better option; they'll give you a pretty 
young woman there (not a girl though; Islam is the only one standing 
against Americanism on this).

On 2019-11-01 14:29, Richard Stallman wrote:
> [[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
> [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
> [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]
> 
> There is nothing wrong with jokes in general, and no valid reason in
> general to delete jokes in the Emacs distribution.  If you think there
> is something bad about a particular joke, please suggest deleting that
> specific joke and give the specific reason.

bug#38002: Please remove this joke

[Lars Ingebrigtsen]

Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> writes:

> There is nothing wrong with jokes in general, and no valid reason in
> general to delete jokes in the Emacs distribution.  If you think there
> is something bad about a particular joke, please suggest deleting that
> specific joke and give the specific reason.

I've applied the patch (removing the boring joke), and I agree with you
that there's nothing wrong with jokes in general.

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
   bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no

bug#38002: Please remove this joke

[Marcin Borkowski]

On 2019-11-01, at 16:24, nipponpost@airmail.cc wrote:

> Deleting any jokes (including the one you're acquiescent to removal),
> after accepting the persons work (the code that came along with the
> joke) is extremely disrespectful to the person who did the programming
> work along-side it.

I haven't thought about it this way, but it seems to make sense.  On
closer inspection however, it only _seems_ to make sense, but it
actually does not.

Consider a bad joke a _bug_.  We _want_ to remove bugs from Emacs (or
any other software for that matter).

The problem is, this one particular joke isn't bad at all, quite the
opposite - irrespective whether one laughs at women or hacker's
stereotype of women.  (I think both interpretations are valid, and none
is too offensive for my taste.  The previous joke in the file is
definitely more offensive, for instance.)  IOW, I consider it a feature,
not a bug.  (And I repeated it to many of my friends, and we all had
a good laugh.)

> (And I mean /that/ person, including a time-period element (people
> change, sadly, they're always better when they're younger: when
> they're old they simply give up and obey).)

This, too, is plainly false.  In general, I would rather expect older
people "better" (for some very specific meaning of "better", definitely
not the moral one), due to experience.

> If we liked them we would not waste our lives programming: we would
> chase the women. There is a reason we have the time to do the free
> software programing and media creation. The fact is we tacitly reject
> them because they are tyrants (they would say they rejected us: just
> as they attacked you, RMS, in the past saying you would "never get
> laid" when you asked them to stop sending birth announcements to the
> list), slave drivers, and banned everything we /actually/ wanted
> (marrying /girls/ not /women/).

This is not only false perspective, but it is plainly dangerous.
Pitting men against women (or women against men) is exactly what
feminists do, and it is one of the reasons feminism is such a poison for
the society.

I have a loving wife.  I am a programmer.  I can't see any contradiction
here.  (Happily, my wife is not a feminist - I wouldn't marry one,
anyway.)

BTW, I also know some female programmers.  Not many, but still.

Just my few cents.

Best,

--
Marcin Borkowski
http://mbork.pl

bug#38002: Please remove this joke

[cpardo]

> Marcin Borkowski:
>
> The problem is, this one particular joke isn't bad at all, quite the
> opposite - irrespective whether one laughs at women or hacker's
> stereotype of women.  (I think both interpretations are valid, and none
> is too offensive for my taste.  The previous joke in the file is
> definitely more offensive, for instance.)  IOW, I consider it a feature,
> not a bug.  (And I repeated it to many of my friends, and we all had
> a good laugh.)

Who does the previous joke offend? Are you sure you are reading the
correct one? The removed joke demeans women by describing them as
unpredictable, irrational beings. If you enjoy that kind of humor, good
for you. But hosting it the distribution of one of the flagship software
pieces of a project based on ethics if obviosly wrong.

> This is not only false perspective, but it is plainly dangerous.
> Pitting men against women (or women against men) is exactly what
> feminists do, and it is one of the reasons feminism is such a poison for
> the society.

Feminism aims for equality of the sexes. Such poison.


--
Cecilio Pardo

bug#38002: Please remove this joke

[nipponpost]

A joke is not a bug: it has /absolutely/ nothing to do with the 
operation of the software; it isn't even /part/ of the software.

What it is, is a makers' mark.
A signature.
A piece of the author.
"This is me, this is part of my personality"

Removing the joke is tantamount to removing a maker's mark.
It's basically white-washing the person from the project
and laundering his code.

Now the code, the project, is attributed to the "maintainers",
their system of society is all that is present,
the personality of the actual creators is gone.

It's just as bad as removing the author from the Authors attribution;
it's even worse: from the names you cannot tell /who/ these people were;
but from their jokes you can catch a glimpse.

All maintainers do is take other peoples work, and make sure it
works on new incompatable systems. They then parade around as if
they wrote the whole thing (see: Guix "maintainers" who are demanding
the ouster of RMS from HIS GNU for example).

It's basically plagiarism, in practice.

I'm an attorney btw, if the Authors are angry about this, and I gain 
information about such (if they're still alive), I'll consider guiding 
them regarding copyright law (US). I doubt they're in my juristiction 
though so I could only show them the way. In europe they could perhaps 
assert moral rights aswell (this becomes complicated, due to all the 
different interpretations there-of). In the USA it's the 35 year 
statutory provision in the Copyright Act that could be used.

Respect the guys that helped you; Stop spitting on them.
These Maintainers are not equal to the original programmers who helped 
you.
It's like saying a touch-up artist is the same as a from-scratch 
painter.

Free Software does NOT exist without the Software; which does not exist 
without the Men who BOTHER to write said software to begin with.

If you lost all female contributors from Free Software: you would still 
have it.
If you lost all male contributors you would not.
And men and women do NOT get along.
One dominates the other.
In Anglo-American societies the woman dominates the man and the man is 
just a beast of burden: caged at the first notice of his master to the 
male-handlers (police).

Pandering to the women will not get anyone "laid"
(Though Pandering to Islam will get you young brides (young girls, not 
adult women) eventually; which is why the European policticians wisely 
do so: it's either Americanism or Islam... so they choose the nicer one 
for themselves)

(Note: if anyone wants to question my credentials regarding programming: 
I have a 25Mbyte code diff I can show you; it's not all of my code; but 
alot of it is, and that's on my latest project I've been working on for 
a decade (foss 3d videogame). I know what motivates me and demotivates 
me, and I see who contributes what in FOSS and who simply controls 
others socially, so I'm not fooled. There is a method to all of this, 
and degrading the men like Americans do was not the method that 
succeeded, but is now what is proposed and has been followed for the 
last few years (which has resulted in a quiet /exodus/ of hackers and 
the domination of /foundations/ and /corporate backers/ instead (as 
intended)))

bug#38002: Please remove this joke

[nipponpost]

Any identity based politics will tend towards dominance and exclusion, 
and sometimes destruction of the Other. This is simple human nature; it 
simply does not matter what the rules of the ideaology, religion, etc 
are: in the end the Other will be attacked, dominated, and sometimes 
destroyed.

There can never be equality; Equality is simply the point that 2 ships 
pass in the night.

Feminism itself is a rebranded American Protestant Christian moral.
There was work done to attempt to make it something else in the 60s and 
70s, but this ultimately failed. All it does now is promote Americanism 
in Europe, and abroad; which is a shame.

Men have no place in society now, not if they are the thinking kind.
If they will go along to get along, "provide", and chase "hot wimmin" 
they're accepted. If they think "hmm what will be the outcomes here" and 
see divorce, alimony, child support, paying for a house they are not 
allowed in, and the woman becoming old in seconds flat... they would opt 
out... or defect elsewhere... and are not welcomed.

Some American Protestants were calling for RMS' expulsion and /arrest/ 
recently.
Feminism means I cannot marry young girls: yes it is poison to /me/.
The old religions, which I read in their original and old translations, 
allow me such: thus much better for /me/.

(Yes I know "sex positive" feminism was "going-to-be" different: but it 
failed. Feminism in the 1800s and 1900s was sex-negative, and again it 
is sex-negative for men but sex-positive for women today (1990s, 2000, 
2010s))

Men being /mules/ (as in America) is _very_ good for women. Men being 
barred young girls is _very_ good for women. It is not good for men. 
America is not good for men at all.

Ethics is simply "Americanism"; just a modern religion.
Free Software is all about /opposing/ the 1975 etc copyright Act, of the 
USA; the one that extended copyright to software: that is it's origin 
and what it is about. Not any other "Ethics".

I do not code Free Software to be bound to what American whites consider 
"correct and moral". I do not code FS for "Ethical" reasons: I program 
because I like to /tinker/ and I want others, who will mostly be men, to 
beable to /tinker/ too (paying it forward in that, and only that, way: 
in that specific subject). That pretty much goes for all hackers most 
likely (but not maintainers or people involved to make a name for 
themselves).

In the end, I code free software, and got a law degree and license... 
because I have nothing else to do; and no prospects of doing so. Good 
hobbies. Pointless life.


On 2019-11-01 20:13, cpardo@imayhem.com wrote:
>> Marcin Borkowski:
>> 
>> The problem is, this one particular joke isn't bad at all, quite the
>> opposite - irrespective whether one laughs at women or hacker's
>> stereotype of women.  (I think both interpretations are valid, and 
>> none
>> is too offensive for my taste.  The previous joke in the file is
>> definitely more offensive, for instance.)  IOW, I consider it a 
>> feature,
>> not a bug.  (And I repeated it to many of my friends, and we all had
>> a good laugh.)
> 
> Who does the previous joke offend? Are you sure you are reading the
> correct one? The removed joke demeans women by describing them as
> unpredictable, irrational beings. If you enjoy that kind of humor, good
> for you. But hosting it the distribution of one of the flagship 
> software
> pieces of a project based on ethics if obviosly wrong.
> 
>> This is not only false perspective, but it is plainly dangerous.
>> Pitting men against women (or women against men) is exactly what
>> feminists do, and it is one of the reasons feminism is such a poison 
>> for
>> the society.
> 
> Feminism aims for equality of the sexes. Such poison.
> 
> 
> --
> Cecilio Pardo

bug#38002: Please remove this joke

[nipponpost]

And I am going to find out who added that joke, if at all I possibly 
can, and inform him about copyright reversion under section 203 of the 
Copyright Act.

www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap2.html#203

And No: these contributions are not works for hire.
(Note regarding 35 years: I assume his code was as ancient as his joke.)

On 2019-11-01 16:21, Lars Ingebrigtsen wrote:
> Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> writes:
> 
>> There is nothing wrong with jokes in general, and no valid reason in
>> general to delete jokes in the Emacs distribution.  If you think there
>> is something bad about a particular joke, please suggest deleting that
>> specific joke and give the specific reason.
> 
> I've applied the patch (removing the boring joke), and I agree with you
> that there's nothing wrong with jokes in general.

bug#38002: Please remove this joke

[Juanma Barranquero]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 372 bytes --]

On Sat, Nov 2, 2019 at 12:44 AM <nipponpost@airmail.cc> wrote:

> And I am going to find out who added that joke, if at all I possibly
> can, and inform him about copyright reversion under section 203 of the
> Copyright Act.

I compiled the original jokes, and committed the file.

And I'm glad the joke has been removed. It was sexist. I wasn't aware then,
but I am now.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 478 bytes --]

bug#38002: Please remove this joke

[Marcin Borkowski]

On 2019-11-01, at 21:13, cpardo@imayhem.com wrote:

>> Marcin Borkowski:
>>
>> The problem is, this one particular joke isn't bad at all, quite the
>> opposite - irrespective whether one laughs at women or hacker's
>> stereotype of women.  (I think both interpretations are valid, and none
>> is too offensive for my taste.  The previous joke in the file is
>> definitely more offensive, for instance.)  IOW, I consider it a feature,
>> not a bug.  (And I repeated it to many of my friends, and we all had
>> a good laugh.)
>
> Who does the previous joke offend? Are you sure you are reading the

Well, apparently I expressed myself wrong - I should have said that some
people might consider it blasphemous, which is way worse than just
"offensive".  (I gave it some thought and I personally _think_ it's not,
though I'd definitely not tell it anyone - it's extremely bad taste.)

> correct one? The removed joke demeans women by describing them as
> unpredictable, irrational beings. If you enjoy that kind of humor, good

I don't entirely see why being unpredictable and irrational is
necessarily inferior to being predictable and rational.  There are cases
when these are exactly the qualities which may be needed.  And even if
not, _if_ we assume than women indeed possess these qualities (in some
statistical sense, of course), this does not make them "worse" than men
at all.  There are other qualities women may have than men lack, and all
that implies is that men and women are _different_, and neither sex
Pareto-dominates the other one, so to speak.

Besides, it is your interpretation (as I mentioned, I consider it
a valid one).  Another, equally valid one is that the jokes demeans
hackers by describing them as believing women are unpredictable and
irrational (whereas the truth is more complicated), and fear of women
might be somewhat implied.

Yet another interpretation would be that a joke is on a meta level, and
what is really the object of laughter is the simplistic _stereotype_ of
women.  This interpretation seems not to demean anyone.

> for you. But hosting it the distribution of one of the flagship software
> pieces of a project based on ethics if obviosly wrong.
>
>> This is not only false perspective, but it is plainly dangerous.
>> Pitting men against women (or women against men) is exactly what
>> feminists do, and it is one of the reasons feminism is such a poison for
>> the society.
>
> Feminism aims for equality of the sexes. Such poison.

I obviously do not share this belief.  And even if it did aim for
_equality_, actually defining it is crucial.  Some kinds of equality are
morally good.  Some are morally bad.  In a sense, you don't want "too
much equality".  (We had a certain movement towards it here in Eastern
Europe, btw.  It didn't end well.)

Best,

--
Marcin Borkowski
http://mbork.pl

bug#38002: Please remove this joke

[Marcin Borkowski]

On 2019-11-01, at 21:30, nipponpost@airmail.cc wrote:

> A joke is not a bug: it has /absolutely/ nothing to do with the
> operation of the software; it isn't even /part/ of the software.

The Emacs manual explicitly claims that unclear documentation is a bug
(in the docs).  I think that you can say the same about a bad joke.

Fun fact: I am currently writing a book (a pretty serious textbook on
advanced mathematics, by three authors), and I've put a fair share of
jokes in it.  A reviewer asked to remove one of them.  I was slightly
sad, but I did it without much hesitation.  (Though both the reviewer
and me agreed that it was not _bad_ per se.)

> What it is, is a makers' mark.
> A signature.
> A piece of the author.
> "This is me, this is part of my personality"

You could apply exactly the same words to some bugs.  Yet, we remove
them.

Best,

--
Marcin Borkowski
http://mbork.pl

bug#38002: Please remove this joke

[nipponpost]

I am going to find who actually created the joke, if at all I possibly 
can, and inform HIM about copyright reversion under section 203 of the 
Copyright Act.

Additionally, in the fullness of time, I will also inform your Estate 
about said feature of the Copyright Act, along with all others who 
contributed code to free-software I can find who are affected by this 
war against sexism.

I will inform the Estates and Persons of the damages they can claim if 
the notice of reversion is not complied with, I will also inform them 
about derivative works and how any replacement code my very-well be 
derivative.

On 2019-11-02 02:14, Juanma Barranquero wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 2, 2019 at 12:44 AM <nipponpost@airmail.cc> wrote:
> 
>> And I am going to find out who added that joke, if at all I possibly
>> can, and inform him about copyright reversion under section 203 of
> the
>> Copyright Act.
> 
> I compiled the original jokes, and committed the file.
> 
> And I'm glad the joke has been removed. It was sexist. I wasn't aware
> then, but I am now.

bug#38002: Please remove this joke

[Alan Mackenzie]

In article <mailman.425.1572711186.13325.bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org> you wrote:
> I am going to find who actually created the joke, if at all I possibly 
> can, and inform HIM about copyright reversion under section 203 of the 
> Copyright Act.

> Additionally, in the fullness of time, I will also inform your Estate 
> about said feature of the Copyright Act, along with all others who 
> contributed code to free-software I can find who are affected by this 
> war against sexism.

> I will inform the Estates and Persons of the damages they can claim if 
> the notice of reversion is not complied with, I will also inform them 
> about derivative works and how any replacement code my very-well be 
> derivative.

Whoever you are, your posts are offensive and threatening.

Please be aware that the Free Software Foundation has some very good
lawyers on its staff, who know all about copyright.

Why are you hiding your identity?  What are you scared of?

Please identify yourself.

-- 
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).

bug#38002: Please remove this joke

[Richard Stallman]

[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]

You have put anti-woman spin on my article that I do not agree with.
(I just added some text to make it clear I do not agree.)

In any case, that is irrelevant to this mailing list -- please don't
discuss that here.

-- 
Dr Richard Stallman
Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://gnu.org, https://fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)

bug#38002: Please remove this joke - Informing of legal rights is not a threat - 35 year copyright recovery for non-works-for-hire

[nipponpost]

I'm a licensed attorney and have been studying copyright for years.
I am not going to identify myself.
Informing people of their legal rights is not a threat, and the FSF will 
lose any statutory revocation action in the US. And yes, I already know 
the legal arguments you are going to make (you will beg the courts to 
consider the charitable exception regarding the requirement for 
consideration when making a binding promise to donate, however here 
Congress chose to completely bypass and nullify contract-law principals 
(and exceptions) and write in a statutory right of recovery after 35 
years (within a window of time) for copyrights, regardless of what the 
license contract or assignment said. You will also try to claim that the 
works were works for hire, you will fail on that as well)

On 2019-11-02 21:06, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
> In article <mailman.425.1572711186.13325.bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org> you 
> wrote:
>> I am going to find who actually created the joke, if at all I possibly
>> can, and inform HIM about copyright reversion under section 203 of the
>> Copyright Act.
> 
>> Additionally, in the fullness of time, I will also inform your Estate
>> about said feature of the Copyright Act, along with all others who
>> contributed code to free-software I can find who are affected by this
>> war against sexism.
> 
>> I will inform the Estates and Persons of the damages they can claim if
>> the notice of reversion is not complied with, I will also inform them
>> about derivative works and how any replacement code my very-well be
>> derivative.
> 
> Whoever you are, your posts are offensive and threatening.
> 
> Please be aware that the Free Software Foundation has some very good
> lawyers on its staff, who know all about copyright.
> 
> Why are you hiding your identity?  What are you scared of?
> 
> Please identify yourself.

bug#38002: Please remove this joke

[Lars Ingebrigtsen]

Please do not feed the trolls.

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
   bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no