Ubuntu Is A Poor Standard Bearer For Linux

@jacog Yes I have. Have you read the title of this thread? "There is no sexism in the Linux community. None at all..." Comprende?

BTW, there is no prom tradition in Holland. We make out where we park our bikes.

Steve and Caitlyn and CB --

This one is a tough call. So developer-arrogant-asshole and so freakin' sexist.

I'm going to give a tilt to the sexism, because even the boneheaded developer-asshole angle seems to be driven by lonely boner sexism.

What a moron.

If this guy donates his brain to science, it's going to a veterinary school.

That said, it is a good idea to keep up with the laundry.

@theBeez: I should have know you'd turn up with your claim that there really is no sexism. Read the quote again about how women (and me specifically) should be home taking care of the family and staying away from writing about Linux. That's classic sexism. I can't help it if you're in denial or have a compelling need to defend sexist men. That's your problem.

Then we have this wonderful comment:

Quoting:And now we have a revelation from a clueless chick, that "Ubuntu' or whatever, has no standards..

I will be writing about sexism in the Linux community, in FOSS and in IT in general whenever we have another egregious example. I may even use you as an example of part of the problem. I won't shut up or go away.

@caitlyn (1) Show me where I claimed there is no sexism in FOSS. Everything is online. C'mon..! Back it up! (2) Show me where I agreed to the expression that guy gave. In any way or form. Jerks are everywhere. You just give 'em more airtime this way. (3) Try using me as an example. You may not like me, but I'm a bad example to your cause. (4) I won't shut up, neither I'll go away.

Beez, every time she (or any woman) points out an obvious sexist pig, there you are trying to claim "oh it isn't that bad, get over yourself." Actually, this is what you said, in this very thread:

Quoting:And do we really have to go into this "sexism" issue again, this "Hi guys" - "Oh, the depths of my soul are irretrievably torn apart for eternity" thing?

In light of the pertinent quote, your point #1 is satisfied.

Agreement is immaterial, and your point #2 is moot (pathetic attempt at distraction). The proper concern is your defense of the indefensible, which makes point #3 satisfied by definition. Like an enabler for an addict in a dysfunctional relationship, your consistent denials have become embarrassingly predictable in this regard.

As for point #4, neither you nor I have the final say on it. That's explained in paragraph 10 of the TOS.

@gus3: I'd have written a response to Hans but you've done it so well there simply is no need. Thank you!

@theBeez: Hans, using you as an example is easy. I would just quote you verbatim. As Gus pointed out your words do speak for themselves.

I don't know about the sexism, but its a pretty decent article and very true.

@gus3 (1) It just says, we've covered this issue before - not that there is no sexism. (2) It just shows how pathetic the reasoning of my opponents is. Is there any reasoning? Conjecture, your honor! Leading he witness. immaterial.

Yeah, I knew it.

I pity any woman in your life. Well, up to a point.

@gus3 I think I can ask her to do the talking for herself.. If you prefer. That would point out how ridiculous your abusive and offensive allegations are. Not to speak of the threats that are made to my very person.

> Not to speak of the threats that are made to my very person.

While there may have been, I'm not aware of any which took place in these fora, and I have followed the threads.

Hans is right about one thing though, we've covered this before, and it's unlikely that anyone will change their minds. As for me, I'm largely in agreement with ComputerBob.

After spewing such bile earlier, now you have the raw chutzpah to be offended?

"Abusive"? "Offensive"?

Yet you defend comments that are abusive and offensive, and you say "they're not that bad." Let me point out what you're defending:

Quoting:Honestly, you should be at home taking care of your children and doing the laundry. If your children can stad you.

You won't call that "offensive and abusive" when it's directed at caitlyn personally, but when I point out the logical consequences of your attitude toward such blatant sexism, now suddenly you shed your tears of faux-victimhood.

The first rule of holes: When you find yourself in one, stop digging. And your hole is deep, indeed.

@gus3 Where am I defending that? Where? Where do I make that chuckle and say: "Yeah, that's put the right way. Take that". I clearly said "Jerks are everywhere. You just give 'em more airtime this way."

On the other hand, I see:

"I will be writing about sexism in the Linux community, (..) I may even use you as an example of part of the problem." "That's explained in paragraph 10 of the TOS." (so eager to get me kicked?) "I can't help it if you're in denial or have a compelling need to defend sexist men." "I pity any woman in your life."

If this is an example of the righteous at heart in FOSS, sexism is a minor problem. Because some people obviously lack not only courtesy, honesty and the ability to have a proper discussion, but also have a serious ethics deficiency.

/me starts taking notes. You never know when they will start looking for ideas for more monty python.

*note* if you think I might be talking about you with that, your probably right.

*wanders off whistling lighter side of life*

One finds sexism when one looks for it.

Just like racism.

Ignore the insensitive lout, whoever it is, and move on.

Working from the presumptions that:

1. Caitlyn's name is pretty well-known in geek circles.

2. Caitlyn's willingness to point out the sexism that she encounters is pretty well-known in geek circles.

3. Every online community has at least a member or two who likes to "act" like an incredibly clueless, insensitive jerk, as some sort of "joke" that only they find funny.

I SUSPECT that it's very possible that "Howe" is one of those people (AKA troll), and he posted blatantly, ridiculously sexist remarks in the comments at the end of Caitlyn's article as "a joke" to pull Caitlyn's chain, knowing that she would probably take the bait and give his "joke" a lot more attention.

Which she did.

In fact, we all did.

And now "Howe" -- a sad and lonely, socially disadvantaged, deeply narcissitic and extremely manipulative personality, thinks he has proven that he is more intelligent than all of us are, and is having a good laugh at our expense, the same way that blackhat guys get a kick out of reading newspaper stories that describe the damage and chaos that their exploits create.

> One finds sexism when one looks for it.

True, but it also sometimes finds you, whether you're looking for it or not.

> Ignore the insensitive lout, whoever it is, and move on.

While often true, some problems don't get better if ignored. And in this case, highlighting that there is a problem is one of the steps in resolving it.

> some problems don't get better if ignored.

I didn't mean it quite like that.

I meant, ignore the _individual_. Put them on the crap-list and let them fall into the void.

I'm with ComBob, someone wanted some attention.

> I meant, ignore the _individual_.

Well, I took that as a given. :)

> ...someone wanted some attention.

Entirely possible, but it's unlikely we'll ever know for sure.

Quoting:True, but it also sometimes finds you, whether you're looking for it or not.

And, sometimes it shows up on a silver platter.

Quoting:> ...someone wanted some attention.

Entirely possible, but it's unlikely we'll ever know for sure.

I like the terms at the bottom of the User Friendly discussion pages: "UserFriendly.Org and its operators are not liable for comments or content posted by its visitors, and will cheerfully assist the lawful authorities in hunting down script-kiddies, spammers and other net scum. And if you're really bad, we'll call your mom. (We're not kidding, we've done it before.)"

I suppose that's one way to find out.