Arch Linux and (the lack of) package signing
Posted Mar 24, 2011 22:09 UTC (Thu) by giraffedata
In reply to: Arch Linux and (the lack of) package signing
Parent article: Arch Linux and (the lack of) package signing
Dan McGee's explanation doesn't cover the censorship, except to mention in passing that it happened and calling the triggering post a "rant that looked more like a blog post." IgnorantGuru says that he was told the problem was that the post was "trolling." I read it, and I don't think this moderator knows what the word means. IgnorantGuru also says the moderator said he was warned multiple times, but he doesn't remember being warned.
McGee makes a good case that IgnorantGuru's criticism was unfair, but I'm still troubled by the silencing of it.
McGee's blog post, by the way, shows him to be hypersensitive and highly defensive with respect to the LWN article. The LWN article is unbalanced, but not dishonest. As a neutral reader, I was aware throughout that I was seeing a report of IgnorantGuru's beliefs. The article's wording is careful enough that it is in fact consistent with McGee's version.
to post comments)