On Sun, 2019-04-14 at 19:13 +0300, Andrew Savchenko wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Apr 2019 11:48:06 -0400 Aaron Bauman wrote:
> > On Sun, Apr 14, 2019 at 06:28:15PM +0300, Andrew Savchenko wrote:
> > > On Sun, 14 Apr 2019 16:11:50 +0200 Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
> > > > > I support the idea of Gentoo being more inclusive.
> > > > 
> > > > Can we please keep irrelevant buzzwords out?
> > > 
> > > There is nothing irrelevant here. Gentoo is kicking people who
> > > want to contribute because doesn't want to respect their privacy
> > > because of some imaginary problems which were never appeared or
> > > tested in real life. This makes Gentoo exclusive to those who want
> > > their authorship to be public.
> > > 
> > > Best regards,
> > > Andrew Savchenko
> > 
> > Andrew, it is not imaginary.  Playing the emotional game doesn't help
> > either.  I am fairly certain all of those who had to make this decision
> > have expressed their willingness to change it should it be supported
> > legally.  It simply is not.
> 
> If it is not imaginary please provide a court case against Gentoo
> or other free software distribution on this matter and some
> evidence that proposed signed-off real name attribution played a
> measurable effect.
> 
> As far as I can see this whole story is pure speculation of:
> 1) what may happen
> 2) what will help if 1) is to happen.
> 
> So far I saw zero practical evidence on both points.

So to summarize, you're claiming that you're allowed to do anything
as long as the other person can't prove somebody has already been
punished for the same thing?  I suppose that's a pretty interesting
concept of law.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny