From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A464313800E for ; Sun, 29 Jul 2012 00:15:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B7634E064F; Sun, 29 Jul 2012 00:15:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 047FAE0511 for ; Sun, 29 Jul 2012 00:14:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6356E1B400A for ; Sun, 29 Jul 2012 00:14:23 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new using ClamAV at gentoo.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.459 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.459 tagged_above=-999 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=-0.547, BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=no Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6z6YMWExDjd4 for ; Sun, 29 Jul 2012 00:14:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from plane.gmane.org (plane.gmane.org [80.91.229.3]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9DDE41B4002 for ; Sun, 29 Jul 2012 00:14:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1SvH9B-0002uf-DJ for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Sun, 29 Jul 2012 02:14:13 +0200 Received: from ip68-231-22-224.ph.ph.cox.net ([68.231.22.224]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 29 Jul 2012 02:14:13 +0200 Received: from 1i5t5.duncan by ip68-231-22-224.ph.ph.cox.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 29 Jul 2012 02:14:13 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: virtual/libudev Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2012 00:14:00 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <1343494307.2870.0@NeddySeagoon> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ip68-231-22-224.ph.ph.cox.net User-Agent: Pan/0.139 (Sexual Chocolate; GIT b5aeade /usr/src/portage/src/egit-src/pan2) X-Archives-Salt: 7b6ea78d-3b69-4de5-88d5-c0e37bbebe2a X-Archives-Hash: ab8fa36862df1b88bbf8cd1077622c21 Roy Bamford posted on Sat, 28 Jul 2012 17:51:47 +0100 as excerpted: > You don't want to listen to Presidents too much. Look at other real > life examples. > > Would you claim that the President of the Gentoo Foundation speaks for > Gentoo? If he were making claims of that nature, yes, barring information to the contrary, I'd assume he had authority/authorization to do so, and would definitely hold gentoo to a responsibility to either follow thru or remove him for cause for making such claims without authorization to do so (or at very minimum, to publicly repudiate the claims if they didn't intend to follow thru). If none of that happened, I'd blame gentoo even more than the spokesperson that made the claim, without public repudiation. You're right, they're PR people and as such, their claims must (unfortunately) be taken with a grain of salt. But that doesn't eliminate the responsibility of whatever organization to either follow thru or repudiate, as it's the reputation and credibility of that organization on the line if they don't. -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman