From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: John Darrington Subject: Re: Being excellent to one another Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2017 13:10:47 +0100 Message-ID: <20170320121047.GA23894@jocasta.intra> References: <20170318110952.xhhobwl5ep4mlbpj@abyayala> <878to27laf.fsf_-_@gnu.org> <87inn499gk.fsf@dustycloud.org> <20170319195707.175eb056@khaalida> <20170320063619.GA20517@jocasta.intra> <878to0fhr3.fsf@gmail.com> <20170320095447.GA22437@jocasta.intra> <871stsfe13.fsf@gmail.com> <20170320104406.GA22867@jocasta.intra> <87ziggdwh4.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="zhXaljGHf11kAtnf" Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:60792) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cpw9R-0000si-Kt for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 20 Mar 2017 08:11:06 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cpw9N-0006lE-4K for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 20 Mar 2017 08:11:05 -0400 Received: from de.cellform.com ([88.217.224.109]:33133 helo=jocasta.intra) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cpw9M-0006df-MJ for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 20 Mar 2017 08:11:00 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87ziggdwh4.fsf@gmail.com> List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: Alex Sassmannshausen Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org --zhXaljGHf11kAtnf Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 12:21:59PM +0100, Alex Sassmannshausen wrote: My intention was to call-back to my impression of other parts of this conversation where it seemed you were point-blank refusing to acknowledge ng0's request. As I recall, their request was that I always use "singular they" and never = to=20 mention other possible alternatives to anyone. I acknowledge their request= and=20 recognise their every right to make it. But I feel no obligation to comply= with their request. Ng0's reaction to my declining, I interpreted to mean that = they=20 considered it not to be a request, but a demand. If this interpretation wa= s=20 wrong, then I apologise to them. =20 Say whaat? Way to blow our discussion out of proportion. Are you seriously suggesting the consensus established through conversation and convention in a small community is in any way comparable to the pile of dung that is the contemporary ridiculously complex and terrifyingly non-egalitarian state of global authoritarian politics? I believe the current state of global politics has come about through popul= ism. In part, that means some people have been coerced into supporting what they would not otherwise have supported - because of peer pressure. I do support what I believe to be wrong - ethically, technically or gramatically= - simply because a majority of other people say I should. =20 --=20 Avoid eavesdropping. Send strong encrypted email. PGP Public key ID: 1024D/2DE827B3=20 fingerprint =3D 8797 A26D 0854 2EAB 0285 A290 8A67 719C 2DE8 27B3 See http://sks-keyservers.net or any PGP keyserver for public key. --zhXaljGHf11kAtnf Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iEYEARECAAYFAljPxscACgkQimdxnC3oJ7Om8QCfSkJGdcUwffSrOG5CpabLolF4 cq4An1utSNPuLnYpHCiwCgPTETt5Dvzt =jzoI -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --zhXaljGHf11kAtnf--