Mail Archives: cygwin/2005/01/05/23:56:48
> On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 11:32:14PM -0500, Brian Bruns wrote:
> >Remember, alot of these have been in the fortunes package
> for god knows
> >how long, and Cygwin isn't the only one thats going to have
> them. I'm
> >betting that any distro that has the Fortunes package has them too.
>
> Right. The README of the package says this:
>
> The potentially offensive fortunes are installed by default
> on FreeBSD
> systems. If you're absolutely, *positively*,
> without-a-shadow-of-a-doubt sure that your user community goes
> berzerk/sues your pants off/drops dead upon reading one of
> them, edit
> the Makefile in the subdirectory datfiles, and do "make all
> install".
>
> So, we do undoubtedly have the default version and I am
> undoubtedly getting more prudish about this type of thing.
>
> Maybe we need a vote. I would really like to know how people
> feel about this. We haven't had a vote in a long time so:
>
> How do you feel about the off-color content in the cygwin
> fortune files?
>
> [ ] Offended. Think about the children!
> [ ] Not offended. Stop bothering me with your Puritanical values.
> [ ] Don't care. Can we go back to talking about how
> negative this list is now?
>
>
My write-in candidate:
[x] Not offended. Clean it up anyway. It's unprofessional in the extreme
and can only result in embarassment and trouble.
But in the interest of democracy, I offer the following additional vote
category (to be clear, this is NOT my vote):
[ ] Offended by its tameness. Change the project name to "Cygpr0n" and add
packages of pron videos, jpgs, and fan fiction.
Do the right thing Corinna/Chris/Whoever.
--
Gary R. Van Sickle
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
- Raw text -