[Freedombox-discuss] Introducing the Technical Advisory Committee

[Ted Smith]

On Sat, 2011-05-28 at 09:38 -0500, J.A. Terranson wrote:
> On Sat, 28 May 2011, Ted Smith wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 2011-05-27 at 22:50 -0500, J.A. Terranson wrote:
> > > On Fri, 27 May 2011, Ted Smith wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hopefully now the people on the mailing list who stupidly propose and
> > > > stupidly shoot down PET-related freedombox things will shut up, since
> > > > it's clear they have no actual say.
> > >
> > > "Stupidly"?  Is it "stupid" because it's a view you disagree with, or is
> > > it stupid for some other STUPID, ad-hominem reason?
> > >
> > > //Alif
> > >
> >
> > A lot of (sure, not all, but most) the PET-related ideas are stupid,
>
> *I* think most, if not all of the current ideas for the FB are
> *technologically unworkable* (at this time anyway), but thats a *long* way
> from "stupid".  Sorry Ted, but by declaring everything as "stupid", it is
> *you* who are arguing from false authority (and with straw arguments no
> less).  Do you even listen to yourself?
>
> > and shooting down ideas because they aren't in keeping with the "vision
> > of the FreedomBox" is stupid unless you work for the FBF and actually
> > can state with authority what is and isn't the freedombox.
>
> As an "open" project, *everyone* is both encouraged and entitled to put
> forward their own visions of the FB - that said, the box *is* the dominion
> of the FBF, and their word *is* the last one.  The ideas put forward from
> "outside" the FBF are *not* "stupid" just because you don't believe they
> are (a) viable; (b) correct for the FBF's "vision"; (c) any other reason
> you can state.
>
> "Stupid" is an attack term and nothing more. It doesn't add to the
> discourse, in fact, it just makes *you* look "stupid" for arguing from
> behind that curtain.

I guess my idea of a productive mailing list excludes posts about
technologically unworkable ideas from people who will never be able to
implement them that will never be adopted under the FB aegis. I think
that that's stupid, and I'm not afraid to say so.

It seems that you're okay with that, and that's okay -- it just means
you have more free time to read and ponder mailing list messages than I
do, or have a much lower possibility barrier when faced with possible
time investments.

But considering how vemently you attacked me for making a flip comment
about how I hoped unproductive/stupid mailing list traffic would
decrease on the freedombox list in the presence of an organized group
advancing the FBF agenda, I think at this point it's more probable that
you're just pissed off that I called you out for putting too much faith
in electoral democracy than that you have a strong inclination to defend
unproductive mailing list postings.

[demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/pgp-signature which had a name of signature.asc]