On 9 March 2015 at 10:40, Chris Murphy <lists@colorremedies.com> wrote:
On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 9:39 AM, Stephen John Smoogen <smooge@gmail.com> wrote:
>> When someone says a compulsory password quality policy is actionable,
>> they are telling me my judgement cannot be trusted for my own device,
>> without respect to context. And yet I see other OS's, distros, mobile
>> devices, none of which have such a requirement or are yet even more
>> permissive, and that makes me distrust these proponents. A gap in
>> trust has formed, and widens as proponents don't even acknowledge such
>> concerns and push for the change violating myriad long standing
>> expectations in the relationship between user, device and OS. But I
>> must comply if I depend on the GUI installer, and this abrogation
>> constitutes a misfeasance. That makes me mad because it's unfair.
>>
>> I challenge you to find a single flaw in that sequence.
>>
>
> There are multiple ways. I could go to the extreme and say your first
> questionable judgement was that you used a distribution and allowed others
> to decide for you what packages were in the core, which versions, which
> compiler options. Coming in at the end and saying 'woah this is takes away
> my rights from my device.' is really closing the doors after the barn.
> However that would just make take the argument to the next Godwin level and
> waste a lot of electrons.

Except, you just did. You didn't actually refrain.


You are correct. I was snide, over-the-top and rude. What I said was inexcusable and wrong. I apologize and withdraw from this conversation.
 

--
Stephen J Smoogen.