From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jan 5 14:24:03 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BFCC16A4CE for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 14:24:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from rwcrmhc13.comcast.net (rwcrmhc13.comcast.net [204.127.198.39]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6497A43D48 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 14:23:46 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from underway@comcast.net) Received: from localhost.localdomain (12-230-74-101.client.attbi.com[12.230.74.101]) by comcast.net (rwcrmhc13) with ESMTP id <2004010522234501500p3pl4e>; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 22:23:45 +0000 Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) i05MLfgS035462; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 14:21:41 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from underway@comcast.net) Received: (from jojo@localhost) by localhost.localdomain (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i05MLaBu035461; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 14:21:36 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from underway@comcast.net) To: chat@freebsd.org References: <20040105175904.GA32112@online.fr> From: underway@comcast.net (Gary W. Swearingen) Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2004 14:21:35 -0800 In-Reply-To: <20040105175904.GA32112@online.fr> (Rahul Siddharthan's message of "Mon, 5 Jan 2004 12:59:04 -0500") Message-ID: <52ad526nps.d52@mail.comcast.net> User-Agent: Gnus/5.1002 (Gnus v5.10.2) XEmacs/21.4 (Portable Code, berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii cc: Rahul Siddharthan Subject: Re: Personal patches X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2004 22:24:03 -0000 Rahul Siddharthan writes: > I barely knew Limbaugh's name before coming to the US. Some people don't care for USA-centric entries. I could come up with many other categories of entries that many people would prefer be removed or at least segregated. > Why should FreeBSD give an international pulpit to some little-known > ignorant American broadcaster? Because it's considered to be very wrong to push someone away from a pulpit when he's speaking. Especially when another FreeBSD committer walked him to the pulpit and other FreeBSD users want him to be heard. Too many people care too much about who's speaking rather than about what's being said. But for that reason at least, I can see how Limbaugh's "Truths" wouldn't be as offensive to those outside the USA. The fortune system probably should be redesigned so that entries could get multiple tags like "offensive to some", "humorous to some", "Euro-centric", etc. BTW, as an occasional listener and former fan of Limbaugh's since 1988, I find that your characterizations of him as little-known, ignorant, stupid, bigoted, and unhumorous are all generally false and are made in a blatant and hateful manner that is harmful to the purposes of this forum. He has made it easy enough for you to disparage him without resort to such nasty tactics. (I say "former fan" because I think he should be socially punished for having hurt his Cause as he has. As for legal punishments, I hold the common libertarian position.) > Would a random idiot hack from, say, Japan, Norway, or > other countries with FreeBSD contributors, make it to the fortune > files? As long as he's found a translator, like Friedrich Nietzsche did. > It may be an "offensive" fortune file but that doesn't mean > offensiveness is the only criterion for inclusion. So what are the criterion? Where should the line be drawn (in a space with many more than two dimensions)? The manpage describes the entries with the terms "hopefully interesting", "adage", "epigram", "maxims", and "sayings". There's no requirement for humor. Limbaugh's "Undeniable Truths of Life" surely qualify, even if many people (including me) would label many of them as uninteresting, in spite of the fact that the thought has been interesting enough for people to argue about for thousands of years. The requirement for offensiveness is well-met by the mere fact that they carry Limbaugh's name, as shown so well in this chat thread. My main problem with the file is with the "balance" of the file. One entry uncharacteristicly uses "my brother-in-law" as the butt of a joke, while the bulk of such entries use someone like Ronald Reagan and only a few use someone like Jimmy Carter. (I say "like" because Reagan appears 18 times while Carter never appears.) But I suppose the imbalance approximates the attitudes of committers who are prone to caring about such expressions of opinion as the fortunes program. "Let he who is without humility make the first deletion."