Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 8:30 AM, Marije Baalman wrote:
Before I begin this reply I must first (and I do suggest that you all do
the same) go inform my assistant to hurry up and boil some pitch, for it
will soon be needed if we are to tar and feather this rogue, nay, this
scoundrel who calls himself '' on IRC. Ah, but before we put to shame
this impudent wretch, let us take a moment to consider the gravity of his
evil deed. Let us review the transcript once more:
falktx_: I had to look up the image to see what he was talking
about... hardly offensive.
Here, the evil one appears to saying that he researched the image that
Shane Richards compared to pornography, and found it to be nothing of the
sort. Only a true villain could be so blind to the fact that everything
seen through holy eyes is pornographic.
this pic: http://kxstudio.sourceforge.net/tmp/scr124.png
it's Hatsune Miku
a big thing on japanese culture actually
I've switched the default to be without her pose, but the 12.04.1
KXStudio ISO will remain with that as default
I think it's very cute
haha, oh man.
falktx_: Ah, but you're not a 350lbs angry wife.
falktx_: you are ecchi, man
male: whoa, shots fired!
Here, 14 year old loser, (not to be confused with an adult man
who selflessly devotes massive amounts of his time to developing and
maintaining what many consider to be the premier Linux Audio oriented
distribution), mentions that he thinks the image of Hatsune Miku is cute.
Blasphemy! The rotten prankster , in his twisted little mind, tries
to imagine what kind of person would be "not amused" by the image. Because
of his low class standing, is clearly aware that "not amused" is a
euphemism that (sexist) men use when the searing hatred that often emanates
from jealous individuals. He knows that Mr. Richards also referred the
individual beaming this hatred as his 'partner', a euphemism for wife...
What kind of wife would be jealous of a cute little cartoon doll figure?
Why, a morbidly obese one, of course. This kind of accurate and witty humor
is exactly what is wrong with the world today. We must stamp it out
immediately and instead exalt the kind of impotent, holy rage the Mr.
Richards exemplified in his original post, where he reached for people to
blame for his own failure to backup his working system.
falktx_: Change it to this (NSFW) in the next release:
Next, the greasy and fox-like suggests a new image to be the default
background. An image that is what everyone who read Mr. Richards original
post imagined the background to be, but was disappointed to discover that
it was not. By using wit to expose Mr. Richards' comments as misleading, if
not libelous, this has delivered a great blow to our righteous
indignation. This cannot be allowed.
Forthwith, the tar will be ready! Down with lightly mocking humor. Down
with this toxic reasonable-ness. We must not let these devils interfere
with our right, nay, our God Given Right, to be offended by any and every
thing we see on this Earth, from now till judgement day!
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 8:30 AM, Marije =
Baalman <email@example.com> wrote:
I had to go back and find this original post (or was there more that I
missed? ... not watching this list so closely at the moment), to see
what the fuzz was all about.
My 2 cents:
The picture per se is not so much the problem, I think, the alternative
picture suggested (jokingly?) by the person using <male> as nickname<=
would be problematic. But more importantly, I get the impression (from
his remark about the angry wife) that the person using <male> as
nickname in the IRC has a serious problem with his wife, and respect
towards her, and maybe women in general, and I can't escape the
impression that his marriage is suffering from it. But alas, there's
only so much you can interpret into a short chat history that you
didn't partake in.
<snip>Before I begin this reply I must =
first (and I do suggest that you all do the same) go inform my assistant to=
hurry up and boil some pitch, for it will soon be needed if we are to tar =
and feather this rogue, nay, this scoundrel who calls himself '<male=