Re: Formalising the release naming process [Was: GNOME Development Release 2.5.3]

On Mon, 2004-02-09 at 20:33, jamie wrote:
> On Tue, 2004-02-10 at 01:28, Rob Adams wrote:
>  It's interesting though that in this case there seems to be no one who
> > was actually offended, but rather all this resulted merely from the
> > thought that there theoretically _might_ be someone offended.
> Thats missing the point. It was quite literally "below the belt" and to
> call it inappropriate is an understatement. Its potentially damaging and
> highly embarrasing IMO. 

It was inappropriate.  Calling it "below the belt" is an overstatement. 
Had it used a crasser name for genetalia, then perhaps it would have
been below the belt.  Testicles *is* the medically correct term here.

> Can you imagine the damage if MS used this as Anti-Gnome propaganda
> ("Would you trust/use a product which its own developers attribute the
> word ******** to" etc etc). 

> I feel sorry too for someone promoting the stuff who gets asked "So
> What's Gnome go to do with ******** then?" by potential business users.

> I can't believe you don't have an editor who proof reads everything
> prior to being submitted to the Gnome Announcement list or any other
> media designed for wider public consumption. If you did, things like
> this would not or should not happen - letting any johnny post whatever
> he likes there is asking for trouble. 

You can't believe we don't have an overbearing corporate culture that
stifles everything we do with too much process?  You can't believe that
volunteers don't go out of their way to burden themselves with more red

The issue is resolved.  Let's not drag this thread out as well.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]