4 ms·

I don't think you're arguing in good faith here. Have a good one!

belorn 2y ago
Is it so hard to believe that some people do not want to mix software advocacy with political advocacy? It no more bad faith than people arguing that they want to keep their professional life and personal life separate. I find it much easier to trust Debian if they don't involve themself with world politics and focus on software freedoms. Same with a company if they focus on being a company rather than a political advocacy.
- angoragoats 2y ago
  Advocating for the right of minorities and other disadvantaged groups to exist is not “world politics” and it saddens me that I’ve had to say this multiple times on this site.
  - teddyh 2y ago
    > Advocating for the right of minorities and other disadvantaged groups to exist is not “world politics” The top-level topic was the stated reason for Debian to stop posting on X, which was “[…] we feel X doesn't reflect Debian shared values as stated in our social contract, code of conduct and diversity statement. X evolved into a place where people we care about don't feel safe.”. This does not even name who is feeling unsafe, and certainly does not say that X is against the existence of “minorities and other disadvantaged groups”. And this is not even relevant to our subtopic in this tree, where I have never argued against the existence of anyone. It is utterly disingenous of you to cast aspersions that everyone not agreeing with you – in this case me – are standing with what X is being indirectly accused of.
teddyh 2y ago
ITYM that you have run out of arguments and your ad-hominem accusations are not working.
- angoragoats 2y ago
  No, but next time please learn about what an ad hominem fallacy is[0], because you just committed one. [0] https://laurencetennant.com/bonds/adhominem.html https://laurencetennant.com/bonds/adhominem.html
  - teddyh 2y ago
    Accusing me, out of the blue, of not arguing in good faith is certainly what I would call an ad hominem. According to your link, which does seem plausible, I am wrong about this definition, and I admit that I very well could be. This still does not make it OK for you to accuse me of not arguing in good faith, without explaining how.

Is it so hard to believe that some people do not want to mix software advocacy with political advocacy? It no more bad faith than people arguing that they want to keep their professional life and personal life separate. I find it much easier to trust Debian if they don't involve themself with world politics and focus on software freedoms. Same with a company if they focus on being a company rather than a political advocacy.

angoragoats 2y ago
Advocating for the right of minorities and other disadvantaged groups to exist is not “world politics” and it saddens me that I’ve had to say this multiple times on this site.
- teddyh 2y ago
  > Advocating for the right of minorities and other disadvantaged groups to exist is not “world politics” The top-level topic was the stated reason for Debian to stop posting on X, which was “[…] we feel X doesn't reflect Debian shared values as stated in our social contract, code of conduct and diversity statement. X evolved into a place where people we care about don't feel safe.”. This does not even name who is feeling unsafe, and certainly does not say that X is against the existence of “minorities and other disadvantaged groups”. And this is not even relevant to our subtopic in this tree, where I have never argued against the existence of anyone. It is utterly disingenous of you to cast aspersions that everyone not agreeing with you – in this case me – are standing with what X is being indirectly accused of.

teddyh 2y ago

ITYM that you have run out of arguments and your ad-hominem accusations are not working.

angoragoats 2y ago
No, but next time please learn about what an ad hominem fallacy is[0], because you just committed one. [0] https://laurencetennant.com/bonds/adhominem.html https://laurencetennant.com/bonds/adhominem.html
- teddyh 2y ago
  Accusing me, out of the blue, of not arguing in good faith is certainly what I would call an ad hominem. According to your link, which does seem plausible, I am wrong about this definition, and I admit that I very well could be. This still does not make it OK for you to accuse me of not arguing in good faith, without explaining how.