linux-kernel - Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAMP44s1w0dfv7peUU3DnHLujf5rtyK6xfCpcWRJhMTMvFHcjug@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 23 Jul 2013 19:51:03 -0500
From:	Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@...il.com>
To:	Daniel Phillips <d.phillips@...tner.samsung.com>
Cc:	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
	"ksummit-2013-discuss@...ts.linuxfoundation.org" 
	<ksummit-2013-discuss@...ts.linuxfoundation.org>,
	Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@...citrix.com>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Darren Hart <dvhart@...ux.intel.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>, stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
	Chris Ball <cjb@...top.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML

On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 8:02 PM, Daniel Phillips
<d.phillips@...tner.samsung.com> wrote:
> On 07/20/2013 12:36 PM, Felipe Contreras wrote:
>> I think you need more than "hope" to change one of the fundamental
>> rules of LKML; be open and honest, even if that means expressing your
>> opinion in a way that others might consider offensive and colorful.
>
> Logical fallacy type: bifurcation. You can be open and honest without
> being offensive or abusive.

You are mistaken, that is not what the false dichotomy fallacy means.
I'm not saying you have to be A (open and honest), or B (polite), and
that you can't be both, if that's what you arguing (which seems to be
the case), you are wrong, and to argue against that position would be
a straw man fallacy.

Your mistaken fallacy seems to be that you think one can *always* be
both A (open and honest), and B (polite), I'm not sure if there's a
name for that fallacy, but you don't provide any evidence for that
claim.

And even supposing that such an obvious fallacy (that one can *always*
be both open and honest, and polite) was true, the fact that something
*can* be done, doesn't mean it *should* be done.

-- 
Felipe Contreras
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/