owlfish: (Default)

Re: "disclaimer"

posted by [personal profile] owlfish at 10:31pm on 24/06/2002
Whether or no it's a joke, it still makes some intriguing points. And as to it's joke-intention, very interesting question! Let's see... one of the authors has as his/her current goal a Daypop #1 position. And the one comment on it votes with you, it's a joke. Contributor #2 to the Manifesto doesn't have it obviously mentioned on his site, and certainly isn't proud enough of it to list it under bio info. And clearly it makes NO sense when it claims it's aiming for being an official policy. As if that were feasible!

Conclusion: Yes, you're right. But I still think the Readme was meant seriously. It's aiming at an idealism that isn't as funny because it's more feasible.
[parent entry] [link] [parent] [reply]
 

Re: "disclaimer"

posted by [identity profile] bitterpickle.livejournal.com at 07:51am on 25/06/2002
Oh, I realize now that you meant it's more feasible than the manifesto. But that isn't a fair comparison at all.
The Manifesto is set out as something that people would pledge to, willingly agree to. That readme is meant as a tyrannical attempt to change the very nature of the internet, and control the way people view things displayed publicly.
[link] [parent] [reply]

October

SunMonTueWedThuFriSat
1
 
 2
 
 3
 
 4
 
 5
 
 6
 
 7
 
8
 
 9
 
 10
1
 11
 
 12
 
 13
 
 14
 
15
 
 16
 
 17
 
 18
 
 19
 
 20
 
 21
 
22
 
 23
 
 24
 
 25
 
 26
 
 27
 
 28
 
29
 
 30
 
 31