From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 39996 invoked by alias); 9 May 2018 08:34:31 -0000 Mailing-List: contact libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libc-alpha-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 39891 invoked by uid 89); 9 May 2018 08:34:31 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=professional, foreign X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Message-ID: <1525854861.21101.20.camel@redhat.com> Subject: Re: gag rule joke From: Torvald Riegel To: rms@gnu.org Cc: nenolod@dereferenced.org, aoliva@redhat.com, fw@deneb.enyo.de, carlos@redhat.com, zackw@panix.com, libc-alpha@sourceware.org Date: Wed, 09 May 2018 08:34:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: References: <87wowkx6t0.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de> <1525772620.7567.721.camel@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2018-05/txt/msg00383.txt.bz2 On Tue, 2018-05-08 at 23:33 -0400, 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. ]]] > > When you summarize the discussion based on the substantial points, you > filter out the verbal aggressions. But there are plenty of them there > in messages sent to me. Where have there been "verbal aggressions" or "gross personal insults and attacks" (quoting your earlier email) *on this list*? Conversations on this lists were the context for your earlier claims, so the libc-alpha archive should be sufficient for you to refer to the instances you thought were "verbal aggression". I don't know what emails were sent off-list, in private to you, but it obviously doesn't relate to your earlier claim that there would be publicly visible verbal aggression that would scare of others from being a part of the community. And unless those emails have been from people deeply involved in the glibc community, you can't blame the community for what people outside of the community do. People in the community also didn't tell others to send you email or stuff like that, all they did was disagree with you, and in a professional manner. > Not everyone engaged in aggression, but it is an important part of the > nature of this situation. Please be specific. What's the situation, what's the context? In the absence of examples of "verbal aggression" on this list, you can't be talking about the "situation" in the meaning of the actual discussion we're having on this list. If the "situation" is your personal situation (eg, including mail sent by others not in the glibc community), then I think you need to resolve it in some other way; the glibc community didn't ask others outside of the community to become engaged, so it seems unlikely it would have success asking them to not be engaged. FWIW, to everyone reading this: This is a glibc-community discussion. Please do your best to focus on the glibc-related points, and keep it civilized.