Quoting Edward Bartolo (edbarx@???):

> Rich Meon wrote:

Seriously, now? Isn't this just a bit childish?


> For a "process-person" to claim publishing a manifesto (Debian Social
> Contract) and then, unexpectedly, stressing "They do what they think
> is best, and claim it best meets the needs of
> their users and the free software community", is ironically a rational
> somersault that proclaims contradiction.

I think you rather badly missed some important -- actually, vital --
nuances in what I was saying.

You claimed the existence of the
serve-the-users-and-free-software-community clauses in Debian
Project's Social Contract contradicts what I said (that the developers
run the project to serve their own agendas). My reply was no, they
simply interpret whatever they decide as best meeting the needs of their
users and the free software community.

I did _not_ say that they actually are meeting the priorities of the
users and the free software community. I just said that's the way they
interpret their document. Moreover, I said I was amazed that anyone
would be surprised at this.

For whatever it's worth, Joey Hess is a friend and former co-worker of
mine. And I agree with him.


Are you done hyperventilating? I'm getting just a bit concerned for
your well-being.



> According to you, voters vote for a political party basing their vote
> on the party's electoral manifesto, then suddenly when the party wins
> the government, they can be told the government does what they think
> is best, and claim it best meets the needs of their electors!

This is nothing like what I said. I think you need to get a great deal
better at reading, sir.