[aur-general] Should TUs tolarate inapropiate behavior in the AUR?

William Di Luigi williamdiluigi at gmail.com
Fri Feb 12 22:11:13 UTC 2016

On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 10:37 PM, P. A. López-Valencia
<vorbote at outlook.com> wrote:
> I do the same as well. Don't try to make the argument that "as the
> arsehole has more packages, he deserves to be in charge".

Nice strawman you got there.

For the record (if you actually misread me and aren't really trying to
mislead), I never said that nor I believe that.

> You would do it if you had already been harassed in private for the
> previous six months, maybe more.

Why didn't you bring up the issue when the harassment was happening?
I'm not asking in an aggressive manner, it's just that I think you
should have done that (instead of attacking him/her after a lot of
time has passed, and throwing ad-hominem accusations instead of actual
harassment proof).

> I don't recall those details because,
> who would? That's the kind of thing you simply forget (If you are a
> Christian, you'll know the application of "turning the other cheek"). I
> certainly thought at the time I let Vuze go "Fuck it, he can have it and
> the turd polishig dummy can deal with the psycho." I can only guess
> David Blair went through a similar experience; may you not be in our shoes.

I'm sorry that you felt that way, but the best thing you can do is
recall exactly those details you forgot. From what I read, I don't see
that Det did anything wrong.


More information about the aur-general mailing list