Hi,
I am weighing in as a user. Sure community spirit is important but someone already said it, please don't use historical events that affected millions of people as a comparison for an issue you are having that's not really impeding on your ability to staying alive.
Milk was spilled, share the link to the post, we can all weigh in collectively whether it is a matter the community should investigate further or leave it.
Thank you to anyone that spend time, modding, contributing to packages and thats answered my questions in post or on Reddit !
Cheerio!
2025-05-02T08:06:06Z arch-general-request(a)lists.archlinux.org:
> Send Arch-general mailing list submissions to
> arch-general(a)lists.archlinux.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via email, send a message with subject or
> body 'help' to
> arch-general-request(a)lists.archlinux.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> arch-general-owner(a)lists.archlinux.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Arch-general digest..."
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: Arrogant reply on forums (LuKaRo)
> 2. Re: Arrogant reply on forums (Óscar García Amor)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Fri, 2 May 2025 09:46:21 +0200
> From: LuKaRo <lists(a)lrose.de>
> Subject: Re: Arrogant reply on forums
> To: arch-general(a)lists.archlinux.org
> Message-ID: <a18f92b5-4050-4f7f-b953-9f37dc907549(a)lrose.de>
> Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
> boundary="------------0zPYycE2iWyI60ADO9wAssk9"
>
> Out of curiosity: Is it? I couldn't find a source, where the purpose of
> arch-general is defined, but I thought it is for "general Arch Linux
> stuff", which includes community topics for me.
>
> lukaro
>
> On 5/2/25 6:00 AM, Martin Zecher wrote:
>> Please stop spamming our emails, this is for technical stuff. You can
>> freely discuss about human rights and whatever you want somewhere else.
>>
>>
>> ====
>> Martin Zecher
>>
>> El jue, 1 may 2025, 22:55, Ralf Mardorf <ralf-mardorf(a)riseup.net>
>> escribió:
>>
>> On Fri, 2025-05-02 at 00:51 +0200, Camelia Lavender wrote:
>> > I think that the direct reference and comparison to hitler and
>> nazism
>> > (in the reply) was completely inappropriate and quite frankly
>> > unacceptable, because it is antisemitic, and it makes it look like
>> > those things weren't extremely serious.
>>
>> The accusation of anti-Semitism does not make sense. A comparison with
>> Hitler and the NAZIS is inappropriate in most cases, but not
>> automatically anti-Semitic. There is currently a world situation in
>> which diplomacy should be practiced and insinuations of anti-Semitism
>> should be treated with great caution. Labeling unpopular
>> worldviews and
>> questionable opinions as anti-Semitic per se does not help in any way.
>> You don't necessarily have to go one better. Please stop!
>>