<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN"> <HTML> <HEAD> <META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"> <META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 6.5.7654.12"> <TITLE>RE: shameful censoring of mono opposition</TITLE> </HEAD> <BODY>  > it would be better if it was removed from the repos too, but ubuntu > would get back some of its respect if it at least removed MONO from > the default install like Fedora is doing. A few questions: a) "Respect" from whom, exactly? You? Paige? b) Why does this matter? Is someone running a contest for "most respected Linux distribution? Are there prizes? c) Why don't you just go ahead, use Fedora and let Ubuntu proceed to its (in your view) inevitable doom? Wouldn't that free up a lot of your time for more useful things than inciting conversations a which can't really lead to any productive result on mailing lists about distributions you don't "respect"? A few related observations: a) "Respect", if it matters at all, only matter coming from those who are, themselves, worthy of respect. b) I'd suggest that if there's any meaningful dimension to "respect", it might be measured by the number of people who take the time to actually use a given distro. If that's the case, Ubuntu seems to be more "respected" than Fedora. c) I can point to plenty of things which Miguel and others have done which seem to me to be deeply worthy of respect from my view, starting with GNOME and working on from there. I can't think of any similarly significant contributions from Mark Fink or from Paige Thompson. Why would I "respect" your view more than Miguel's? "Respect" is earned around these parts by doing heavy lifting, not by posting messages to mailing lists. </BODY> </HTML>