[packman] Packman security policy questions

[Aniruddha]

On Sat, 2007-11-03 at 23:03 +0100, Toni wrote:
> > If you don't have anything on-topic to add please don't reply at all.

> oh, I forgot: other views than yours are not allowed. 
> 
> I will nether, nether question again your point of view. It is absolutely 
> necessary, we must hava a security policy. You are right.
> 
> How could we life without one ... and how could we sleep at night without such 
> a policy. We must inform immediately all our users about this serious 
> irregularity. Dammned.
> 
> And, a second note: don't forbid others to reply or not. OK ?


Sigh, I am really getting tired of taking you by the hand to correct
your mistakes, so this my last attempt to talk some reason into you.

1st of all I don't "forbid forbid others to reply or not". I ask
politely (I even say please) to refrain from replying with off-topic
comments. Read again -slowly- the first sentence of this e-mail.

Now about your off topic remarks. The golden rule of discussion (and
debating) is to stay on topic, in other words; address the arguments
your opponents present and don't use logical fallacies like:
    
-argumentum ad antiquitatem
-argumentum ad hominem
-argumentum ad ignorantiam
-argumentum ad logicam
-argumentum ad misericordiam
-argumentum ad nauseam
-argumentum ad numerum
-argumentum ad populum
-argumentum ad verecundiam
-complex question
-post hoc ergo propter hoc
-red herring
-slippery slope
-straw man
-tu quoque
 etc. etc.

Maybe you can tell me which off these logical fallacies you have used?
You might actually learn something.

-- 
Regards,

Aniruddha