Ubuntu Satanic Edition gets banned from DistroWatch

[Sand & Mercury]

Saw this on their website and found it interesting:
Ever wondered why Ubuntu Satanic Edition is not on Distrowatch, the popular guide to the world of Linux? We contacted Ladislav Bodnar, the maintainer of the site, and this was his reply:

There is no way I am going to add this distro to DistroWatch. Two reasons:

“1. I don’t consider the name “Satanic edition” as an appropriate name for a Linux distribution. Believe me, there are many very sensitive people visiting DistroWatch who would be offended by the name of your distro. There is a line between what is and what isn’t an appropriate name for a software product and I believe that you’ve crossed that line.

2. Ubuntu is a registered trademark of Canonical. You need to show me an official permission from Canonical that grants you the use of the word Ubuntu in your product’s name.

Regards,
Ladislav”

When we’d got up off the floor, we send the following response:

“Woah!

What about Muslim and Christian editions?! It seems that your worries about trademark infringement and offensive material don’t stop you from including those.

I thought Distrowatch was supost to be a list of Linux distributions. Surely it your purpose is to reflect the world of Linux and not dictate it.”

So, it seems you won’t be seeing your favourite distro on “distro”watch. At least until hell freezes over.
Source - http://ubuntusatanic.org/news/banned-from-distrowatch/

What do you folks make of this? I don't use USE, but are people really that easily offended? Do you think the word "Satanic" has the power to strike fear into the conservative mind and scare people away at its mere utterance?

Seems pretty bloody stupid to me. I wouldn't really say it's a reflection of the Linux community at all but just the mindset of some people in general.

[Scruffynerf]

"1 teacup, hold the storm please"

FWIW, I think that Distrowatch is right on the money on both counts here.

1) Historically and culturally, both Satanism, and that which it represents, is considered at the least in very bad taste, and generally fairly objectional. Linux is spread mainly though word of mouth advertising, hence people tend to recommend it to others - there isn't the single big corporation with billions to spend on marketing (until relatively recently) - hence efforts are made to cater for market segments / user needs. There isn't a need for linux to deliberately go around offending large swathes of the international community.

2) Ubuntu is trademarked, and not by you. Other Ubuntu derivatives (Ultimate Edition) etc had to pull the use of the term 'Ubuntu' at Canonicals request. I'm not aware if the folks behind the Christian, Women's and Muslim's respective editions have the blessing of Canonical to use the 'Ubuntu' brand.

Also, from poking around the site in your link, what's distinguishing this edition from a generic Ubuntu install, other than some artwork?

[olskar]

Ridiculous.. I know a lot of people who could also be "offended" by Christian and Muslim Ubuntu. Every day you read in the newspapers about people being "offended" by this and that. People in todays society is being "offended" to easy.

I'm not a Satanist myself but I do not found it "offending", here is by the way some of the "The Eleven Satanic Rules of the Earth" (with risk of "offending" someone)

# Do not take that which does not belong to you unless it is a burden to the other person and he cries out to be relieved
# Do not harm little children
# Do not kill non-human animals unless you are attacked or for your food

[billgoldberg]

Saw this on their website and found it interesting:

Source - http://ubuntusatanic.org/news/banned-from-distrowatch/

What do you folks make of this? I don't use USE, but are people really that easily offended? Do you think the word "Satanic" has the power to strike fear into the conservative mind and scare people away at its mere utterance?

Seems pretty bloody stupid to me. I wouldn't really say it's a reflection of the Linux community at all but just the mindset of some people in general.

Yeah, well I'm not going to visit them anymore.

I hate this kind of male cow feces.

[Sand & Mercury]

Satanism's a recognised religion, no different from any other... I think "Satanic Edition" isn't really the most apt name because it seems like it's named so more just to turn heads than offer anything really specifically for Satanists; its differences from vanilla Ubuntu seem purely cosmetic as far as I see, admittedly.

Mark Shuttleworth's said in interviews that he knows about Ubuntu SE and has absolutely no problem with its existence. (Source (http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS2432715660.html))

The concept of Satanism is a little bit of a taboo for very archaic reasons. It's only highly conservative people that will quake with fear at its mention; Satanism is a completely legit religion and it doesn't involve slaughter of goats, sexual abuse of children, etc like most people seem to believe. Basically its message seems to be to worship yourself. But that's rather beside the point.

[fiddledd]

Doesn't surprise me at all. It seems that lately it's becoming more and more difficult to even discuss certain Religions without someone taking offence. And I'm talking about the Internet, not in the street. The so called unfettered Internet. I suppose it would be interesting to know which country Distrowatch's servers are hosted in, and from what country most of their revenue comes, via support or advertising.

EDIT: This is about a Linux distro, but religion has been mentioned. OMGPP here we come.:)

[sloggerkhan]

Reason 1 given by this idiot is something that shouldn't be his perogative to decide.
He has no authority to set himself up as a gatekeeper to what names distro's may use.

Reason 2 is also moot. It is clearly not his obligation to enforce canonical's copyright unless canonical pursues a takedown notice or legal action.

This really pisses me off. What we have here is an individual inject their biases into what ought to be an informational database.

Distrowatch is clearly a betrayal of the principals of GNU and Linux.

[Vivaldi Gloria]

Scruffynerf, I agree with you on 2. But not on 1.

1) Historically and culturally, both Satanism, and that which it represents, is considered at the least in very bad taste, and generally fairly objectional.

Being "in bad taste" or "objectional" is subjective and no good reason to drop a distro. As far as I can see the satanic edition doesn't suggest anything illegal. On the other hand I'm for dropping editions like "ubuntu phedophile edition" or "ubuntu heroin users edition" which suggest illegal activities.

Linux is spread mainly though word of mouth advertising, hence people tend to recommend it to others

The users of the satanic edition also have mouths.

hence efforts are made to cater for market segments / user needs.

Maybe there is a market for the satanic edition.

There isn't a need for linux to deliberately go around offending large swathes of the international community.

Who are you to dictate which communities are fit for linux adoption. It's possible that satanic community adopt linux as well. It's an unwarranted assumption (and wrong in my view) to say that the satanic edition will tarnish the whole linux name in general. This is equivalent to subject satanic books to cencorship because they will give bad names to all books in general.

By the way, I hate "satanism" but it's not illegal and I find the idea of censoring them disgusting.

Bottom line is, they should be let in DW once they drop "ubuntu" from their name or get the permission to use it.

[powerpleb]

I think "Satanic Edition" isn't really the most apt name because it seems like it's named so more just to turn heads than offer anything really specifically for Satanists; its differences from vanilla Ubuntu seem purely cosmetic as far as I see, admittedly.

Well... see... that's really the point. I don't think actual Satanists would really get anything out of having their own 'edition' of Ubuntu seen as their philosophy seems to be follow your own lead/urges rather than identifying themselves as a member of a group and adhering to it's values. So I'd say that whoever made this 'distro' was probably more likely to be a kid who is particularly good at GIMP than a community of Satanists. But I'm no Satanist and I may be wrong.

[Sand & Mercury]

Well... see... that's really the point. I don't think actual Satanists would really get anything out of having their own 'edition' of Ubuntu seen as their philosophy seems to be follow your own lead/urges rather than identifying themselves as a member of a group. So I'd say that whoever made this 'distro' was probably more likely to be a kid who is particularly good at GIMP than a community of Satanists. But I'm no Satanist and I may be wrong.
I'm no Satanist either but still, do you think that justifies its exclusion?

[uberdonkey5]

well, I agree with the original post (sand & something). Religion has far too many rights to abuse people in most societies. Religious people would feel justified attacking a site which held ubuntu satanic version, whereas the thought of attacking a website of a military dictatorship would be dispicable.

When I lived in ireland I always used to laugh in the local library because in the 'religion' section there were only books on christianity. Books on islam, taosim, jainism, ba'hai, zorastrianism, judaism, buddhism etc were all kept in the 'occult' section with books on witchcraft (which ironically most of which were originally written by christians, to discredit pagan belief systems). he he.

Fact is, many people in organised religions tend to be bigotted because they believe in something regardless of the arguments and are unwilling to accept that other people may be correct. I realise this is strong, but I consider myself 'religious' also and I feel it is a shame when other people's freedom is restricted, particualrly when there is no logical reason for this. Why not release a 'ubuntu gay' version.. that would really make things interesting.

P.S. is Satanism really a legit religion? I know wika (witch craft) is. But Satan is usually personified through another religion, no (christianity/judaism/islam etc)? Isn't it bit like being a 'Saint Paulist'? Definately many religious people do have this obsessive fear of satan. Personally I go along with zen buddhist named dogan, "the solution is not to hate what is bad and love what is good, but to avoid discriminating between good and bad (and see things just as they are)"

[Circus-Killer]

i am no satanist, but this is just another blow to the concept of freedom.

[powerpleb]

I'm no Satanist either but still, do you think that justifies its exclusion?

I don't think that justifies it's exclusion.

But artwork alone doesn't justify a new distro. There are already way to many distros (in my opinion). If there was a serious Satanic edition with some new Satanic software that was more than what could be achieved by spending 20 minutes on gnome-look with a vanilla Ubuntu install, then fine.

But otherwise, it's just a waste of webspace for Distrowatch. And yet another useless distro that's going to be released a week after every Ubuntu version and only involved the 'developer' installing the same old theme onto a new Ubuntu.

[SupaSonic]

It's the question of censorship. How would you react to, say, Ubuntu Nazi edition? I'm not saying it's the same as satanic, but where do you draw the line?

[Circus-Killer]

I don't think that justifies it's exclusion.

But artwork alone doesn't justify a new distro. There are already way to many distros (in my opinion). If there was a serious Satanic edition with some new Satanic software that was more than what could be achieved by spending 20 minutes on gnome-look with a vanilla Ubuntu install, then fine.

But otherwise, it's just a waste of webspace for Distrowatch. And yet another useless distro that's going to be released a week after every Ubuntu version and only involved the 'developer' installing the same old theme onto a new Ubuntu.

who are you to justify what makes a distribution?
anybody has the right to make changes and distribute those changes, regardless of what your opinion is. if i wanted to make a "manson family edition" with gory pictures, i have that right. it wouldn't be too much of a sane thing to do, but the point is restricting freedom in any sense goes against what the community strives for.

[powerpleb]

It's the question of censorship. How would you react to, say, Ubuntu Nazi edition? I'm not saying it's the same as satanic, but where do you draw the line?

Nazis advocate the extermination of the Jewish race, which for obvious reasons should be stopped/censored. Satanists advocate nothing more than following their own desires. Which doesn't overtly effect anyone else, therefore shouldn't be censored.

But the point is that the Satanic Edition is little more than Ubuntu with some artwork and a few mp3s. Which alone, doesn't bring much to the Linux community, and doesn't justify a new distribution.

[Circus-Killer]

It's the question of censorship. How would you react to, say, Ubuntu Nazi edition? I'm not saying it's the same as satanic, but where do you draw the line?

so it is acceptable for neo-nazis to hold rallys, meetings and marches according to constitutional rights, but cannot create their own distro in a free community?
riiiight.

[powerpleb]

so it is acceptable for neo-nazis to hold rallys, meetings and marches according to constitutional rights
I don't find this acceptable. If Nazis were organising a march in my city I would try to stop them (with a lot of other people of course).

[uberdonkey5]

It's the question of censorship. How would you react to, say, Ubuntu Nazi edition? I'm not saying it's the same as satanic, but where do you draw the line?

yeh, good point. I suppose we don't want to cause offence, in the same way we won't have an 'ubuntu porno' addition (which obviously could have lots of potential for new software). I suppose we should try not to offend, but also take care of our liberty. For example ubuntu forums is a fine example of productive talk whilst limiting offence (through strict control) - much better than most forums on the net.

Unlike a legal system, where people will try to morally justify anything if it is legal (such as exploiting workers), ubuntu is a community. This makes the moral imperative more important. Nazis marching through the city is not illegal but practically in most cases it would be in UK as it would be likely to cause a disturbance of the peace (though British National Party have more freedoms).

HOWEVER, ubuntu being a community, we have to look after each other regardless of whether it is legal or not, so I suppose (in a complete turn around) we have to look after the sensabilities of our christian brothers, unless there is a conflict of interests due to large demand from satanists.... ubuntu [said in gruff S.African accent]

[Vivaldi Gloria]

It's the question of censorship. How would you react to, say, Ubuntu Nazi edition? I'm not saying it's the same as satanic, but where do you draw the line?

How about legality? Nazism, heroin, phedophilia are illegal in european countries so I'd object to such editions. But I wouldn't mind "satanic edition", "sadomasochist edition", "porno edition".

[Bucky Ball]

Is this a joke? This isn't:

I use Satanic Edition Desktop and themes but run straight Ubuntu and Kubuntu blend. Helping out a chrisian with a problem, he PMed me and said he found the christian edition over the top cutesy and twee, and how could he use the Satanic Edition themes!! He wasn't into satan but he loved heavy metal and couldn't wait to get it on his desktop!

Afterthought: I was under the belief that Ubuntu Christian edition was no longer officially supported either ...

There are plenty of people out there that might consider the Christian Edition = the Satanic Edition. Ever thought of that? We don't all live in the bible belt.

[Circus-Killer]

well, to end off, no more rebutting:

i believe in freedom. freedom without restriction. freedom to believe in what i want. now even a nazi edition, as long as they are not bringing physical harm to humans/animals, i have no problem. its only when nazi's get violent that i have an issue with.

but i will not take away a persons freedom to express themselves, nor take away their freedoms that free software gives them. who are we to start justifying what should be allowed free? by doing so, would make it no longer free.

as said before, this is not freedom, because one man's opinion forced onto another destroys all meaning to the word freedom.

[Circus-Killer]

How about legality? Nazism, heroin, phedophilia are illegal in european countries to I'd object to such editions. But I wouldn't mind "satanic edition", "sadomasochist edition", "porno edition".

i know i promised no more rebuttels, but c'mon, this is too easy.

not everyone lives in the europian union. countries have the right to their own laws and beliefs.

[Bucky Ball]

i believe in freedom. freedom without restriction. freedom to believe in what i want. now even a nazi edition, as long as they are not bringing physical harm to humans/animals, i have no problem. its only when nazi's get violent that i have an issue with.

but i will not take away a persons freedom to express themselves, nor take away their freedoms that free software gives them. who are we to start justifying what should be allowed free? by doing so, would make it no longer free.

as said before, this is not freedom, because one man's opinion forced onto another destroys all meaning to the word freedom.

Here here. +1

[Chessmaster]

Funny, I would think that Satanism has caused less harm, offence, discrimination, war, injustice etc than the vast majority (if not all) of established religions in the world.

Not saying that religious people are bad or anything, but no one can deny that most major religions have been used at some time or other to justify horrific actions in the past, or even present. People have more to be offended about almost all other religious groups than they do Satanism.

Pathetic and rather childish decision by distrowatch if you ask me. Funny that people get their knickers in a twist and are offended by Satanism but generally not the staving and war ravaged millions people suffering in the world. Oh well, as long as people have their priorities right....

[powerpleb]

who are you to justify what makes a distribution?
anybody has the right to make changes and distribute those changes, regardless of what your opinion is. if i wanted to make a "manson family edition" with gory pictures, i have that right. it wouldn't be too much of a sane thing to do, but the point is restricting freedom in any sense goes against what the community strives for.

Fine we'll go there then.

Who are you to dictate what Distrowatch can and can't put on their website? You say you support freedom... but you seem to want to dictate their actions.

I don't care if someone puts a CD image on their website containing 700mb worth of jpegs of chickens and calls it a Linux distro. Obviously they have that right.
But Distrowatch have to carefully decide what justifies them hosting and maintaining a page for a new Linux distribution. If they let every idiot who came up with a bright idea for a new distro put their crap on their website it would be completely unmanageable.

[Chessmaster]

Who are you to dictate what Distrowatch can and can't put on their website? You say you support freedom... but you seem to want to dictate their actions.



I don't think that anyone is saying they have to accept the satanic edition. But, people are quite entitled to point out that their decision is unjust, childish, bigoted, etc.

[Circus-Killer]

Fine we'll go there then.

Who are you to dictate what Distrowatch can and can't put on their website? You say you support freedom... but you seem to want to dictate their actions.

I don't care if someone puts a CD image on their website containing 700mb worth of jpegs of chickens and calls it a Linux distro. Obviously they have that right.
But Distrowatch have to carefully decide what justifies them hosting and maintaining a page for a new Linux distribution.

i agree with you to an extent, but however there mission is to get a list of as many distros as possible, and nowhere do they state that they will regulate this list as they see fit. all they say is that they want to create a list of distros, so by leaving it out, they are declaring it as non-existant.

if you want to create a site like distrowatch, they should clearly state that it is a list of distros that they feel worthy of or that they like.

[TheSlipstream]

You do know that Satanism isn't about fire, flames and tridents, right? I'm not a Satanist, but the Satan part is about doing what you want to do and not letting anything or anyone stop you. This was a pointless rebadge of Ubuntu that serves no one any good. Still, it was not Distrowatch's right to remove the distro. I consider other religious distros equally useless, myself.

[powerpleb]

not everyone lives in the europian union. countries have the right to their own laws and beliefs.

I agree with you there. Even if it was legal for Nazis to march, and the cops were protecting them I (and many others) would still try to stop them.

[SunnyRabbiera]

Indeed, and I think we should let the editors of distrowatch know that we as a linux community dont support this kind of censorship, the Cristian and muslim editions should be banned as well if this is banned

[Chessmaster]

I'm an atheist. I wonder if they would accept "Ubuntu Atheist"? I am sure there are some people who would find that offensive.

[Circus-Killer]

some people find clowns offensive.

[powerpleb]

and nowhere do they state that they will regulate this list as they see fit. all they say is that they want to create a list of distros, so by leaving it out, they are declaring it as non-existant
yes, good point.

Anyway, their stated reason for not including it was that it was apparently offensive (which i don't accept) and that it wasn't officially approved by Ubuntu (which makes it more Ubuntu's problem than Distrowatch's). So my whole argument is void anyway.

[Chessmaster]

I also wonder if they would accept "Gay Ubuntu" or "Homosexual Ubuntu"?

I am sure there a loads of small minded people who would find that offensive as well. And going by distrowatch's selection criteria, they would fall in the same basket as Satanic Edition.

Censorship really does open up a can of worms doesn't it....

[gabhla]

Ideally, all distos should be shown on DistroWatch, regardless of the name, IMO. That said, the owner of DistroWatch has the right (freedom) to run his website. Freedom isn't one-sided.

[powerpleb]

I also wonder if they would accept "Gay Ubuntu" or "Homosexual Ubuntu"?

Surely that would be better if it was named 'Ubuntu Rainbow Edition'

[SunnyRabbiera]

Ideally, all distos should be shown on DistroWatch, regardless of the name, IMO. That said, the owner of DistroWatch has the right (freedom) to run his website. Freedom isn't one-sided.

but in this case it seems to be, linux is supposed to be open you know.

[Chessmaster]

Surely that would be better if it was named 'Ubuntu Rainbow Edition'

"Better" - why? What is wrong with "Gay" or "Homosexual"? Is "rainbow" better because people may find the others offensive? If it is, then it is not so different from banning them.

Or is it you just prefer rainbows?

[Cresho]

You have to draw a line to what offends people. It needs to be neutral! I don't see a ubuntuheaven edition in ditro watch!

[powerpleb]

"Better" - why? What is wrong with "Gay" or "Homosexual"? Is "rainbow" better because people may find the others offensive? If it is, then it is not so different from banning them.

Or is it you just prefer rainbows?

I just think it sounds better. You are aware that the symbol for queer liberation is a rainbow flag aren't you?

[Canis familiaris]

I'm no Satanist either but still, do you think that justifies its exclusion?

No, Certainly Not. But really Distrowatch is a personal website and the owner reserves the right to exclude anything he wishes (correct me if I'm wrong).

[The Grum]

They ban an Ubuntu distro which has the word "Satanic" in it (which started as a parody of the Christian edition), yet they have BSD listed - it has the devil as its mascot! They even show the image. That must offend someone.

If "Satanic Edition" is banned for being offensive, I have to react by declaring "Christian Edition"/"Muslim Edition" offensive. Who do I contact to have it removed?

[bowens44]

It's certainly no more less offensive then a christain distro.

[andrek]

You do know that Satanism isn't about fire, flames and tridents, right? I'm not a Satanist, but the Satan part is about doing what you want to do and not letting anything or anyone stop you.

I'm personally an atheist but I've got to agree with you. People should finally understand that Satanism isn't just about the Satan that Christians know from the Bible. There's also something called LaVeyan Satanism. You can't merge those two things into one group, calling it all evil, eating children and so forth :)
Please, have a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LaVeyan_Satanism

I know few Satanists and they're great people. Seriously.

[Oldsoldier2003]

yes, good point.

Anyway, their stated reason for not including it was that it was apparently offensive (which i don't accept) and that it wasn't officially approved by Ubuntu (which makes it more Ubuntu's problem than Distrowatch's). So my whole argument is void anyway.

It doesn't make it Ubuntu's problem in any way shape or form. Though you don't have to agree with the decision at Distrowatch, arguing about it here is pretty pointless. Regardless of the "why", it's their prerogative to run their site how they wish, and include or exclude any distro by their own criteria. If you disagree, the best solution would be to vote with your feet.

[Oldsoldier2003]

Ideally, all distos should be shown on DistroWatch, regardless of the name, IMO. That said, the owner of DistroWatch has the right (freedom) to run his website. Freedom isn't one-sided.
Ah the opposing view and a good one at that. Also folks need to remember 'property owners rights" apply in a way here.

[Chessmaster]

I just think it sounds better. You are aware that the symbol for queer liberation is a rainbow flag aren't you?

Of course I am aware. But, the point being people should be able to call their distros whatever they like (including rainbow) even if they cause offence. As long as that offence is not unreasonable. Obviously what is considered unreasonable is problematic, but no more so than in other areas of society (some countries definitely handle censorship issues better than others).

I wonder if Distrowatch could possibly be taken to court on this (not that I am suggesting that they should be), on the grounds that they are discriminating along religious grounds. Even if it is their own website they still have to abide by certain laws, and the fact that they have other religious groups up there, it could be argued that they are being discriminatory.

[Chessmaster]

No, Certainly Not. But really Distrowatch is a personal website and the owner reserves the right to exclude anything he wishes (correct me if I'm wrong).

I don't know if he could if it was shown that he was discriminating purely on the grounds of religious preference. Any lawyers out there?

[powerpleb]

I wonder if Distrowatch could possibly be taken to court on this (not that I am suggesting that they should be), on the grounds that they are discriminating along religious grounds.
Yes, but does USE actually represent a religion or is it just someone messing around with scaring looking artwork and metal mp3s?

It's entirely possible (although unlikely) that Satanists could find the depiction of their religion in blood red writing with skulls and 'Linux for the damned' emblazoned across the wallpaper offensive.

[Scruffynerf]

I don't know if he could if it was shown that he was discriminating purely on the grounds of religious preference. Any lawyers out there?

Which would be either unenforceable, or would have the entire site shut down. Either way, counterproductive.

His house, his rules.
--
Man, this thread moved fast.

Regarding my commentary on offensiveness which everyone seems to have jumped on the bandwagon with - I was offering an opinion on the respondent's reasonings. I'd also have thought that the market segments of the Judaic / Moslem and Christian faiths (combined numbers) would also have been significantly larger than those that follow Satanism.

FWIW, I also think that the Christian / Muslim editions are not enough to warrant being called a new distro. Adding in a relatively standard package (Dansguardian) and some artwork (IMHO) does not warrant the label of a new distro, and am surprised at seeing them as listed, as is Ultimate Edition.

So: as a side question - what defines a different distribution? Linux Mint is based off of Ubuntu, and most people would agree that is a different distro, so what does a different distro make?

[bp1509]

Ridiculous.. I know a lot of people who could also be "offended" by Christian and Muslim Ubuntu. Every day you read in the newspapers about people being "offended" by this and that. People in todays society is being "offended" to easy.

I'm not a Satanist myself but I do not found it "offending", here is by the way some of the "The Eleven Satanic Rules of the Earth" (with risk of "offending" someone)

I'm pretty sure the makers and users of the Satanist Edition aren't Satanists either, the Satanist Edition of Ubuntu, is to the religious spin offs, what the Flying Spaghetti Monster is to religion in america's schools. It's making a mockery of them, and argumentatively the makers in arguing with DistroWatch are 100% correct. They can't say a single thing about the Satanic Edition that can't be said about the religious editions.

Don't get me wrong, I enjoy that there's muslims and christian editions. It makes things a bit easier for religious folk and it helps spread linux.

But that being said, DistroWatch is flat out wrong. Sure it's his site and they can do with it as they please, i would never want to infringe on someone's property rights. But they shouldn't be able to advertise they're a true listing of Linux distro's if they're going to start regulating what gets included because of someone's religious bias. Because DW is flat out dictating. And it's false advertising, now.

I would also venture to say that the Christian and Muslim editions don't have explicit right to the Ubuntu trademark either. In fact, I bet Ubuntu-lite doesn't, nor does Fluxbuntu or any number of spin-offs that have ended up on that site. As for being offended, I can show you a lot of angry white man americans who scoff at the idea that Islam even exists. I could show you Muslims who spit in disgust at christian infidels. I could show you atheists that get offended at both. Who cares who's offended?

If you try to please everyone and keep everyone happy, you're going to please no one. I wouldn't be suprised to see this online spat get larger than it is.

[bp1509]

Which would be either unenforceable, or would have the entire site shut down. Either way, counterproductive.

His house, his rules.
--
Man, this thread moved fast.

Regarding my commentary on offensiveness which everyone seems to have jumped on the bandwagon with - I was offering an opinion on the respondent's reasonings. I'd also have thought that the market segments of the Judaic / Moslem and Christian faiths (combined numbers) would also have been significantly larger than those that follow Satanism.

FWIW, I also think that the Christian / Muslim editions are not enough to warrant being called a new distro. Adding in a relatively standard package (Dansguardian) and some artwork (IMHO) does not warrant the label of a new distro, and am surprised at seeing them as listed, as is Ultimate Edition.

So: as a side question - what defines a different distribution? Linux Mint is based off of Ubuntu, and most people would agree that is a different distro, so what does a different distro make?

Ubuntu really twists what a distro is. B/c i don't think Xubuntu nor Kubuntu should get labeled as a separate distro either. Other than the DE and included GUI packages, it's the same thing under the hood. I don't think Mint really is either. Again, just a few extra packages and some artwork.

Where Ubuntu separates itself from Debian though, is in a number of ways. They might be binary compatible but there's things under the hood that are quite different. No su access in ubuntu, no upstart in debian, Ubuntu has it's own repositories and isn't using debian's, apparmor integrated with Ubuntu. It's not just a set of codecs, drivers, and desktop applications and artwork that's different.

[Dragonbite]

Distrowatch is (as per the About Distrowatch (http://distrowatch.com/dwres.php?resource=about) page)The concept started as a very simple table comprising of 5 major distributions and the chart only compared a few features (price, version, release date) and a few package versions (Kernel, KDE, Gnome, XFree86, Apache). Trying to make it slightly more comprehensive and useful (and failing to find anything similar and up-to-date on the Internet), I have kept adding more distributions, features and packages until the table reached fairly reasonable state in terms of information provided. At that stage, I decided to share the table with the Linux community worldwide and moved it from a spreadsheet into an HTML document.

So it doesn't say that he is trying to handle ALL Linux distributions or that he pledges an open and comprehensive listing of Linux (and BSD and Solaris) distros. He has the final call, and as Scruffynerf, fighting it would serve no purpose.

He has the right to protect his property (the website) and if that means filtering out possible trademark violations then that is his right.

Now instead of whining about this here in the forums, a calm open dialog conversation may work help. That and pointing him to the portion of his FAQ page lableled
I've just developed/discovered a new distribution. Will you list it? (http://distrowatch.com/dwres.php?resource=faq) which says
Yes, as long as it is based on a version of the Linux Kernel or BSD, it qualifies for inclusion. However, please be aware that certain categories of distributions, such as small, embedded, floppy-based and distributions running from Windows partitions are currently excluded. This is mainly due to the fact that I don't have enough time and because of other priorities such as automating site updates. I am sorry if you feel disappointed, but I had to draw the line somewhere.

Also show him how this version meets the Canonical's trademark regulations including that listed below (found on the wiki page)
Therefore, if you are creating a derivative of Ubuntu, you may use the Trademarks in association with the software product provided:


the changes are minimal and unsubstantial, as described above
there is no commercial intent associated with the new product
the Trademark is used in a way that makes it clear that your project is a development effort related to the Ubuntu source, but that the software you are working upon is not in fact Ubuntu as distributed by the Ubuntu project. The approved naming scheme to facilitate this is through designation “Remix”. For instance, a new ISO image which has been packaged special tools for software developers could be called “Ubuntu, Developers Remix”, or an image was has been created with Thai language packs could be called "Ubuntu Thai Remix". Words such as "Edition" and "Version" should be avoided, as they have specific meaning within the Ubuntu project. Prefixes, such as “ThaiBuntu” should also be avoided. Any other naming scheme will require explicit permission.
there is no suggestion (through words or appearance) that your project is approved, sponsored, or affiliated with Ubuntu or its related projects unless it has been approved by and is governed by the Ubuntu Community Council.

Any communication between the Ubuntu SE and Canonical would go a long way in convincing him that this is a legitimate, viable distribution that has no illegal or violent intent and has every legitimate right to be listed.

DISCLAIMER : I am not, nor ever played one on TV, any professional such as a Lawyer, Doctor or Comedian and everything I say should be taken with a grain of salt and explored on your own. I will not be held accountable or responsible in any way.

[Dragonbite]

Ubuntu really twists what a distro is. B/c i don't think Xubuntu nor Kubuntu should get labeled as a separate distro either. Other than the DE and included GUI packages, it's the same thing under the hood. I don't think Mint really is either. Again, just a few extra packages and some artwork.

Where Ubuntu separates itself from Debian though, is in a number of ways. They might be binary compatible but there's things under the hood that are quite different. No su access in ubuntu, no upstart in debian, Ubuntu has it's own repositories and isn't using debian's, apparmor integrated with Ubuntu. It's not just a set of codecs, drivers, and desktop applications and artwork that's different.

The line between Ubuntu and Edubuntu/Kubuntu/Xubuntu/etc. also devides a number of Debian based distributions which may use Debian repositories regardless of how modified the distro is.

What about CentOS and Red Hat? Ultimately they are the same except for Trademarks and Red Hat network access (ok... and CentOS uses or did use a newer version of GCC than Red Hat shipped with).

[Dixon Bainbridge]

1) Historically and culturally, both Satanism, and that which it represents, is considered at the least in very bad taste, and generally fairly objectional.

I find all religion and cults objectionable. How many crusades and wars though, have been conducted in the name of satanism? None that I can think of. Still think satanism is a stupid concept, but then I think the same of all organised religion.

Reality ftw.

[Aviendha2008]

For what it's worth...

1-Merriam-Webster describes Satanism as :1: innate wickedness 2: obsession with or affinity for evil; specifically : worship of Satan marked by the travesty of Christian riteshttp://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/satanism">satanism</a> (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/satanism%22%3Esatanism%3C/a%3E)

2- it describes evil as: 1 a: morally reprehensible : sinful, wicked <an evil impulse> b: arising from actual or imputed bad character or conduct <a person of evil reputation> 2 aarchaic : inferior b: causing discomfort or repulsion : offensive <an evil odor> c: disagreeable <woke late and in an evil temper>3 a: causing harm : pernicious <the evil institution of slavery> b: marked by misfortune : unlucky (http://%3Ca%20href=%22http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/evil%22%3Eevil%3C/a%3E)http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/evil

As far as I know, evil is about hurting others. Promoting evil is reprehensible and morally irresponsible. Some people are more responsible than others. Responsibility IS freedom.

2- If none of the pro-USE members defending it are actual satanists, they do not really know what it means, do they? They have it confused with hedonism, I think, <a href="http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hedonism">hedonism</a> (http://%3Ca%20href=%22http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hedonism%22%3Ehedonism%3C/a%3E).

3- though it's disguised as a debate on freedom of expression, it seems to me this is nothing but a farce about a desire to graffiti (or **** on) any private/public property.
Do they merely want to discredit ME and CE and whatnot? Since they just can't just protest openly (that would be, like, responsible) they invoque Satan and say " the devil made me do it!"

"Honey, turn down the volume of your heavy metal! The baby's crying for a change of diapers!"

[tuxxy]

They can't say a single thing about the Satanic Edition that can't be said about the religious editions.

+1 , also is it just me or the artwork look pretty good :lolflag:

[Vivaldi Gloria]

As far as I know, evil is about hurting others.

Excellent !!

Promoting evil is reprehensible and morally irresponsible.

Yeah. Like you I'm also upset about this satanic edition because they don't promote evil. What a waste of potential.

Some people are more responsible than others. Responsibility IS freedom.

Yes. You mean our responsibilities in the ways of our mighty LORD SATAN, right?

If none of the pro-USE members defending it are actual satanists, they do not really know what it means, do they?

I even heard that they don't even kill cats for fun. Lame.

They have it confused with hedonism, I think,

Are you telling me? I can't get them to spill the blood of a cat, for Satan's sake.

though it's disguised as a debate on freedom of expression, it seems to me this is nothing but a farce about a desire to graffiti (or **** on) any private/public property.

Yes. This freedom of expression bull **** also bugs me. I agree with you. Everyone not serving Satan should be silenced.

Do they merely want to discredit ME and CE and whatnot?

Don't worry. The ME and CE guys don't even need discrediting because they are bunch of looseeers already.

they invoque Satan and say " the devil made me do it!"

You speak the truth brother.

"Honey, turn down the volume of your heavy metal! The baby's crying for a change of diapers!"

Mmmmmmm. Babies. Tasty. :twisted:

Welcome to ubuntu forums Aviendha2008. It's nice to see another satan worshipper among us. Our numbers are increasing everyday. One day we will achieve our ultimate goal and reach number 1 in the distrowatch list. Heil Satan. Heil Satan. Heil Satan.

[andrek]

For what it's worth...

(...)blablabla(...)

Have you ever read of The Satanic Bible? Or even heard? It'd doubt it. So please, stop bulls*iting.

Why do you guys limit your knowledge about the Satanism just to those stories from Bible ( which are total crap, btw ) ?

ps. I'm not a Satanist, I'd rather consider myself as an Atheist.

[smoker]

ditto post59 above:lolflag:

much ado about nothing

[caravel]

Did anybody actually read the Ubuntu Satanic Edition site (did distro watch)?

What is Ubuntu Satanic Edition?

Ubuntu SE is a Linux distribution based on Ubuntu. It brings together the best free software and free metal music on one CD.

You can also upgrade your existing Ubuntu installation with a comprehensive set of themes to make your desktop dark and malevolent. Don’t worry; you can easily change your system back if you intend to recant.

It's "Satanic" not "Satanist". Big difference. It just basically has a Satanic theme and some metal music, that's it! Not a Satanist distro at all.

If someone actually posts something that proves the distro is actually Satanist and developed by them, then I'll take it all back (though I dare say there is a lot of stuff that's developed by Satanists that is not overtly Satanic in it's appearance).

[tuxxy]

Im just waiting for thread closure now :lolflag:

[smoker]

... It just basically has a Satanic theme and some metal music, that's it! Not a Satanist distro at all.

doesn't a visceral bill gates appear when you play it backwards?
:lolflag:

[LaRoza]

I hate this kind of male cow feces.
A language note. A cow is a female is just a female of a variety of species. In this case, it may be more correct to say "male bovine", as that is more description.


Satanism's a recognised religion, no different from any other... I think "Satanic Edition" isn't really the most apt name because it seems like it's named so more just to turn heads than offer anything really specifically for Satanists; its differences from vanilla Ubuntu seem purely cosmetic as far as I see, admittedly.

The concept of Satanism is a little bit of a taboo for very archaic reasons. It's only highly conservative people that will quake with fear at its mention; Satanism is a completely legit religion and it doesn't involve slaughter of goats, sexual abuse of children, etc like most people seem to believe. Basically its message seems to be to worship yourself. But that's rather beside the point.

And Ubuntu SE isn't a religious distro (it doesn't follow any satanic path), so it doesn't matter.

The issue here is that Ubuntu SE is banned from distrowatch because of the personal choices of the owner(s) of that site. Although that is contrary to free speech and shows a bias, it is their site, so one can't complain. If you want another site, try distropedia: http://www.cafelinux.org/distropedia/

[Sand & Mercury]

And Ubuntu SE isn't a religious distro (it doesn't follow any satanic path), so it doesn't matter.
That's basically a point I tried to make but somehow managed to fail dismally at. :lol:

The issue here is that Ubuntu SE is banned from distrowatch because of the personal choices of the owner(s) of that site. Although that is contrary to free speech and shows a bias, it is their site, so one can't complain. If you want another site, try distropedia: http://www.cafelinux.org/distropedia/
That's true too. To be clear, I didn't really start this thread as a call-to-arms or anything but I thought it worth bringing up. It struck me as a really rotten attitude on the part of distrowatch's owner.

[SomeGuyDude]

You do know that Satanism isn't about fire, flames and tridents, right? I'm not a Satanist, but the Satan part is about doing what you want to do and not letting anything or anyone stop you. This was a pointless rebadge of Ubuntu that serves no one any good. Still, it was not Distrowatch's right to remove the distro. I consider other religious distros equally useless, myself.

USE was kind of a snarky shot back at UCE, after all.

Personally I think all rebranded distros should be scrapped from DW, because they aren't anything different, just cosmetic changes. Fine. But just one? Now they're making choices based on "offending" people. Now they're being stupid.

[eldragon]

i think ubuntu SE was meant as a joke, and i did laugh when i first heard of it. but get over it, it was never meant to be serious, and if it was meant to be....good god. some dumb people around here...

so im glad distro-watch is not just distribution listing script.

[Aviendha2008]

Well it seems to me that naming a distro in such a way is just asking for trouble...if it's creator just wanted to attract attention, he sure did...The whole thing is a big joke...how can it qualify for a distinct distro? Why not just call it a Satanic theme? Why would anyone want to play with such concepts anyway? Too much time on their hands? Go wash the dishes!

[LaRoza]

That's true too. To be clear, I didn't really start this thread as a call-to-arms or anything but I thought it worth bringing up. It struck me as a really rotten attitude on the part of distrowatch's owner.

I have heard distrowatch being criticised for similiar reasons, ignoring less well known distros. Distropedia has the opposite goal, of recoring even less well known distros, so you could add it there.

Well it seems to me that naming a distro in such a way is just asking for trouble...if it's creator just wanted to attract attention, he sure did...The whole thing is a big joke...how can it qualify for a distinct distro? Why not just call it a Satanic theme? Why would anyone want to play with such concepts anyway? Too much time on their hands? Go wash the dishes!
Have you tried it? A lot of work went into it in several areas. It isn't just a theme anymore (I used it when it was just a theme).

Might as well say Ubuntu is just Debian with a few changes.

(By the way, it is a shame Robert Jordan never finished the series...)

[billgoldberg]

so it is acceptable for neo-nazis to hold rallys, meetings and marches according to constitutional rights, but cannot create their own distro in a free community?
riiiight.

There have been racial distro's before. Even one based on Ubuntu. The name slips my mind.

It's morally questionable, but it can happen and it should be able to happen. Wether I agree with their views or not.

Some people only seem to like freedom of speech when it suits their beliefs.

[Vivaldi Gloria]

There have been racial distro's before. Even one based on Ubuntu. The name slips my mind.

http://www.whitebuntu.org/

It's morally questionable, but it can happen and it should be able to happen. Wether I agree with their views or not.
As long as it doesn't promote anything illegal.

Some people only seem to like freedom of speech when it suits their beliefs.
+1

[anotherdisciple]

I'm a Christian, but I think all the Ubuntu * Editions are kinda dumb.
I like what Ubuntu Christian Edition offers, but I'd rather use regular ubuntu and install the stuff myself.

If they want to be a big help to Ubuntu and Christians they should make a metapackage that depends on all of their software... or make their own repository... something that is an add-on to ubuntu instead of it's own distro.

[gn2]

It's up to the owner of Distrowatch to decide what content is displayed.
If Ubuntu SE is excluded then that's fine by me.

I would also like to see all the religious themed versions of Ubuntu abandoned.

One Ubuntu for all, inclusive of everyone.

[Dixon Bainbridge]

As God, Satan, <insert deity of choice here> doesnt exist, surely all these arguments are moot?

:)

[Abras]

Ugh. Religious arguments always seem to find their way into places where they truly don't belong. Really, all of those religious versions of Ubuntu have always seemed goofy to me, and then the arguing and controversy that follows them seems even goofier. Sometimes I wonder if the world would be a more peaceful place without religion, but then I realize that we'd all probably find some other reason to yell at each other. :)

[Twitch6000]

I'm an atheist. I wonder if they would accept "Ubuntu Atheist"? I am sure there are some people who would find that offensive.

:lolflag: wanna make it and see what happens :).

On a side note I wonder if I made Ubuntu Goth edition

Or Ubuntu Sub Culture Edition

Or even Ubutuntu Metal Head Edition someone would find it offending then ban it...

If so I got people to call to go to court on that.

*second thoughts* Hummm Ubuntu Sub Culture Edition I like that,I might make it.

[Dr Small]

I think all the Ubuntu * Editions are kinda dumb.
+1

I would also like to see all the religious themed versions of Ubuntu abandoned.

One Ubuntu for all, inclusive of everyone.
I agree.

As God, Satan, <insert deity of choice here> doesnt exist, surely all these arguments are moot?

:)

No.

Personally, Satanism offends me, as I am a Christian. But I do not use the Christian edition of Ubuntu either. As a matter of fact, I don't use Ubuntu period. The sole decision on this subject is not for us to be bickering as to whether this distro should be on DistroWatch, but up to the owner of the said site. And I side with him 110%.

Dr Small

[C!oud]

Personally, Satanism offends me, as I am a Christian. But I do not use the Christian edition of Ubuntu either. As a matter of fact, I don't use Ubuntu period. The sole decision on this subject is not for us to be bickering as to whether this distro should be on DistroWatch, but up to the owner of the said site. And I side with him 110%.

Dr Small

And as a satanist I am equally offended by Christianity. As for DistroWatch it's a privately owned site and the owner can quite frankly do whatever he wants. That doesn't mean I agree with the decision since I believe DistroWatch should list all distros as an unbiased selection and allow the consumer to draw their own conclusions. Nor do I like all the separate Ubuntu editions but hey Ubuntu is open source and if someone wants to re brand Ubuntu along with a few extra few packages then they have every right to do so.

[LaRoza]

I would also like to see all the religious themed versions of Ubuntu abandoned.


I would like such anti-freedom comments to be not posted.

[gn2]

I would like such anti-freedom comments to be not posted.

Nothing to do with anti-freedom whatsoever and you left out the bit about me wanting one Ubuntu for all, inclusive of everyone.
Religious themed versions are exclusive.

I would like you to be stripped of your status as moderator, like wanting to see religious themed versions abandoned, that's just me expressing my view.
Or am I not to be allowed to enjoy freedom to express my views? Again.

Note that nothing in this post is intended as an attack on you as a person, I just don't think you're suited to the task of moderator because you do not seem to be moderate.

[diablo75]

First, banning a distro that calls itself Satanic seems awfully silly. I mean look at this little graphic I found on their website:

http://www.davestechsupport.com/blog/images/sepumpkin.png

It's kinda cute actually... all those little jackolantern faces making up the Ubuntu logo. And the rest of the stuff on the website just looks like stuff out of the game Diablo or that boss at the end of Doom II. It's actually pretty cool. I might have to switch to this edition just for the hell of it (no pun intended).

[LaRoza]

Nothing to do with anti-freedom whatsoever and you left out the bit about me wanting one Ubuntu for all, inclusive of everyone.
Religious themed versions are exclusive.

It was a joke, or rather, a paradox about wanting to eliminate certain types of freedom in the name of freedom.


I just don't think you're suited to the task of moderator because you do not seem to be moderate.

You seem to be basing that off the forum referrer to OPP, a very minor and insignificant part of the forum many would like to eliminate (mostly staff, because we have to deal with the mess).

I do not care at all for opinions of me formed there. Most members have different opinions based on their interactions with me from other parts of the forum, the important parts.

[Dragonbite]

One Ubuntu for all, inclusive of everyone.

What you are saying is only a hair's width from "One version of Linux for everybody" which is incorrect. Even within Ubuntu, are you to say that Ubuntu Server should include a GUI? That Edubuntu should abandon the impressive abilities of LTSP? Or is it that everybody should use the Alternate CDs and pick and choose what they want and toss out the window all of the hard work that has gone into making Ubuntu simple to setup and install which has led, in part, to its incredible adoption?

On a side note I wonder if I made Ubuntu Goth edition

That would be a fun one to see.

What the Satatnic Edition should be instead is a Theme that is easy to download and install! If this were easy to make and install (apt-get install ubuntu-theme-satanic ) then we can have all of these personalized versions (satanic, goth, flowers, etc.) and maintain the high quality of work on the technical side.

If they are in the Ubuntu repositories then they may also include some minor technical tweaking beyond that of just colors, and maybe even include some applications.

For example, the Ubuntu CE can not only include the self-styling theme of artwork, colors and logos but can include the applications GnomeSword, BibleMemorizer and BibleTime that makes it different than vanilla Ubuntu.

Actually, it would be better if it specified gtk themes and KDE themes (ubuntu-theme-gtk-satanic, ubuntu-theme-kde-satanic, ubuntu-theme-kde4-satanice, etc.)

[Vivaldi Gloria]

I would like you to be stripped of your status as moderator, like wanting to see religious themed versions abandoned, that's just me expressing my view.


Someone please change the thread title to "express your random views".

[LaRoza]

What the Satatnic Edition should be instead is a Theme that is easy to download and install! If this were easy to make and install (apt-get install ubuntu-theme-satanic ) then we can have all of these personalized versions (satanic, goth, flowers, etc.) and maintain the high quality of work on the technical side.


That is the way it was (and probably still is). When I used it, you just added the repos and installed the packages (there were several) and you were done.

[Dragonbite]

First, banning a distro that calls itself Satanic seems awfully silly. I mean look at this little graphic I found on their website:

http://www.davestechsupport.com/blog/images/sepumpkin.png

It's kinda cute actually... all those little jackolantern faces making up the Ubuntu logo. And the rest of the stuff on the website just looks like stuff out of the game Diablo or that boss at the end of Doom II. It's actually pretty cool. I might have to switch to this edition just for the hell of it (no pun intended).

Actually, I would probably install the theme myself, if it didn't have the word "satanic" on it. The themes are cool but I'd rather not be plastering that stuff all over my screen.

[BenAshton24]

Good, I'm glad it's not getting on there, it's a disgrace to the name of Linux. -- Ben. Ubuntu Christian Edition for the win :D

[LaRoza]

Someone please change the thread title to "express your random views".

Done.

Actually, I would probably install the theme myself, if it didn't have the word "satanic" on it. The themes are cool but I'd rather not be plastering that stuff all over my screen.

I liked the screensavers most of all, mainly to shock people (who know I am a Christian)

[gn2]

It was a joke, or rather, a paradox about wanting to eliminate certain types of freedom in the name of freedom.

Ah, my turn not to get the joke! :D

[Jimmey]

I believe that religion was initially developed as a means to basically condense all of humanity's developed ideas surrounding such concepts as good, fairness, spirituality and faith.

Basically, religion comes about as a method of representing the "right" thing to do (also sometimes a convenient way to explain the otherwise inexplicable ;-))

When I think of the religion most adopted in the country where I live - Christianity - I think of heaven, angels, the bible, and all the good in it. It's the representation of how we all should act (eg, the commandments). They're basically representations of - nice concepts. It's en elaborate goodies VS baddies. My opinion of religion is that it's supposed to keep us in touch with the goodies, in an attempt to keep us all on the straight and relatively narrow.

Satan, in that case, would be the condensation of all of Christianity's understanding of generally bad concepts - Basically represented by the 7 sins (Correct me if I'm off the mark).

So why, when this religion in particular has faced us with a binary contrast between the attractiveness in good and the fruitlessness in evil, would ANYONE want to be "Satanic"?

For me, satanics are people who want to distance themselves from what's conventionally accepted as being "proper" - The type of people who might grow their hair unnecessarily long, wear obvious amounts of make up if they're a boy, and wear obvious amounts of dark coloured make up otherwise. They're the type of people, for me, who do things differently just to stand out. Which is the only scenario in which satanism makes sense - The majority of humanity is pandering for good, so let's "worship" the ultimate portrayal of evil.

Again, in my opinion, it's childish and there's absolutely no justification for it. I can't understand satanism as being anything more than a cry for attention. But maybe I'm being shortsighted. Probably not, though.

[Icehuck]

i am no satanist, but this is just another blow to the concept of freedom.

What freedom? Its his website not yours. Get over it.

[Therion]

It's his website, he can do as he chooses. He's also an a--.

[LaRoza]

Ah, my turn not to get the joke! :D

It seems a rule on this forum for jokes not to be gotten, especially for me :-)

[Jimmey]

I also think that because it is that feller's website, he can do whatever he chooses.

Who dictates that Distrowatch is the only insight into the many Linux distros? I don't see it written officially.

Can you even say that it's "censorship"?

Compare it to this scenario -

If I had a blog, and I wrote about my day, but chose not to include certain episodes from within that day because I felt they might not be appropriate, does anyone really have the right to complain?

Isn't this scenario just an upscaled version of that one? Or am I wrong?

[smoker]

what a furore this banning has caused. probably more people are downloading Satanic Edition than has ever used it before!

i think i'll start selling a CD of a 'Drown Kittens' version, especially tested on animals, sprayed with the cringing sweat of laboratory beagles. get it banned on Distrowatch and sell plenty!

now how do you test a CD on a lab-rat?:lolflag:

[gn2]

What you are saying is only a hair's width from "One version of Linux for everybody" which is incorrect.

Incorrect indeed, that's not at all what I would want.

All I would like is for the varying religious themed versions of Ubuntu to be abandoned.
Keep all the rest.

The reason I think this is because I believe that a community should include everyone irrespective of race or creed.
I see Ubuntu as a community and I feel it should be welcoming and open to all.
I view the religious themed versions as being divisive.

[Vivaldi Gloria]

I believe that religion was initially developed as a means to basically condense all of humanity's developed ideas surrounding such concepts as good, fairness, spirituality and faith.

Basically, religion comes about as a method of representing the "right" thing to do (also sometimes a convenient way to explain the otherwise inexplicable ;-))

When I think of the religion most adopted in the country where I live - Christianity - I think of heaven, angels, the bible, and all the good in it. It's the representation of how we all should act (eg, the commandments). They're basically representations of - nice concepts. It's en elaborate goodies VS baddies. My opinion of religion is that it's supposed to keep us in touch with the goodies, in an attempt to keep us all on the straight and relatively narrow.

Satan, in that case, would be the condensation of all of Christianity's understanding of generally bad concepts - Basically represented by the 7 sins (Correct me if I'm off the mark).

So why, when this religion in particular has faced us with a binary contrast between the attractiveness in good and the fruitlessness in evil, would ANYONE want to be "Satanic"?

For me, satanics are people who want to distance themselves from what's conventionally accepted as being "proper" - The type of people who might grow their hair unnecessarily long, wear obvious amounts of make up if they're a boy, and wear obvious amounts of dark coloured make up otherwise. They're the type of people, for me, who do things differently just to stand out. Which is the only scenario in which satanism makes sense - The majority of humanity is pandering for good, so let's "worship" the ultimate portrayal of evil.

Again, in my opinion, it's childish and there's absolutely no justification for it. I can't understand satanism as being anything more than a cry for attention. But maybe I'm being shortsighted. Probably not, though.

I believe that religion was initially developed as a means to condense all of humanity's developed ideas surrounding such concepts as stupidity, hate, intolerance and war.

Basically, religion comes about as a method of representing the "stupid" thing to do (also sometimes a convenient way to unexplain the otherwise explicable )

When I think of the religion most adopted in the country where I live - Christianity - I think of hell, pain, the bible, and all the nonsense in it. It's the representation of how we all should hate (eg, the science). They're basically representations of - stupid concepts. It's en elaborate stupid VS smart. My opinion of religion is that it's supposed to keep us in touch with the baddies, in an attempt to keep us all on the bigotry and relatively narrow.

God, in that case, would be the condensation of all of Christianity's understanding of generally stupid concepts - Basically represented by the one million dogmas (Correct me if I'm off the mark).

So why, when this religion in particular has faced us with a binary contrast between the attractiveness in stupid and the fruitlessness in intelligent, would ANYONE want to be "Christian"?

For me, christians are people who want to distance themselves from what's conventionally accepted as being "proper" - The type of people who might grow their beard unnecessarily long, wear obvious amounts of jewellery if they're a girl, and keep obviously a bible with them otherwise. They're the type of people, for me, who do things differently just to stand out. Which is the only scenario in which christianity makes sense - The majority of humanity is pandering for smart, so let's "worship" the ultimate portrayal of stupidity.

Again, in my opinion, it's childish and there's absolutely no justification for it. I can't understand christianity as being anything more than a cry for attention. But maybe I'm being shortsighted. Probably not, though.

[Kabezon]

Satanism is not as bad as people think :P Satanist don't go around killing and raping in the name of Satan lol

[Vivaldi Gloria]

What freedom? Its his website not yours. Get over it.

Sure he can do whatever he wants with his site. I'm not criticizing that. I'm criticizing his justification (the first one to be precise).

If I had a blog, and I wrote about my day, but chose not to include certain episodes from within that day because I felt they might not be appropriate, does anyone really have the right to complain?

If you give some suspect reasons of not including "certain episodes" then I can complain about these reasons.

[Erik Trybom]

Ubuntu Satanic Edition - the only distro that has been BANNED from Distrowatch! How cool is that?

This will only further spread the rumour of the notorious black sheep of the Ubuntu family. Soon we will take over the world and no one will notice because we're not on Distrowatch. BWAHAHHAHA!!!

[init1]

Well... see... that's really the point. I don't think actual Satanists would really get anything out of having their own 'edition' of Ubuntu seen as their philosophy seems to be follow your own lead/urges rather than identifying themselves as a member of a group and adhering to it's values. So I'd say that whoever made this 'distro' was probably more likely to be a kid who is particularly good at GIMP than a community of Satanists. But I'm no Satanist and I may be wrong.
You could say the exact same thing about Ubuntu Christian Edition.

[myusername]

while i do not agree with satanism, God did give them a choice. i think it is stupid to allow Muslim edition and Christian edition but not satanic edition. i mean it IS after all a linux distro and people ARE IN FACT using it. so why not recognize it?

[Twitch6000]

What you are saying is only a hair's width from "One version of Linux for everybody" which is incorrect. Even within Ubuntu, are you to say that Ubuntu Server should include a GUI? That Edubuntu should abandon the impressive abilities of LTSP? Or is it that everybody should use the Alternate CDs and pick and choose what they want and toss out the window all of the hard work that has gone into making Ubuntu simple to setup and install which has led, in part, to its incredible adoption?


That would be a fun one to see.

What the Satatnic Edition should be instead is a Theme that is easy to download and install! If this were easy to make and install (apt-get install ubuntu-theme-satanic ) then we can have all of these personalized versions (satanic, goth, flowers, etc.) and maintain the high quality of work on the technical side.

Humm downloading themes that way would be fun :D.
apt-get install ubuntu-theme-goth&&satanic
That would make me happy :)

[Old_Gray_Wolf]

To start, I'm not Christian or Muslim; however, I am religious.

Talk about freedom. This isn't about religious freedom. If you want this distro you can find out about it elsewhere. This is someone else's website. So some people want to take the site owner's freedom away to publish what they choose to?

The Christan and Muslim editions offer software for studying their holy books, scheduling religious activities, and the like. From what I have seen on their website, the Satanic edition doesn't offer a means of studying Anton LaVey's bible, for example. It's just some graphics. So why would it be noteworthy enough to be listed as a distro?

[Matthew Wiebelhaus]

Saw this on their website and found it interesting:

Source - http://ubuntusatanic.org/news/banned-from-distrowatch/

What do you folks make of this? I don't use USE, but are people really that easily offended? Do you think the word "Satanic" has the power to strike fear into the conservative mind and scare people away at its mere utterance?

Seems pretty bloody stupid to me. I wouldn't really say it's a reflection of the Linux community at all but just the mindset of some people in general.

I work with the UbuntuCE project and anything listed under the 3RD PARTY SECTION ON THIS FORUMS IS OBVIOUSLY OFFICIAL. Sorry if this guy is an idiot but there is no Ubuntu Satanic Edition under 3rd Party on these forums are there?

[cardinals_fan]

while i do not agree with satanism, God did give them a choice. i think it is stupid to allow Muslim edition and Christian edition but not satanic edition. i mean it IS after all a linux distro and people ARE IN FACT using it. so why not recognize it?
If Canonical went after CE and ME for using the Ubuntu name, they could face severe consequences from Christians/Muslims worldwide. There aren't many Satanists out there, and I don't think that SE has much to do with Satanism anyway.

[Therion]

I can't be the only one here who realizes the so-called "Satantic Edition" is intended as satirel. Right??

[Polygon]

I can't be the only one here who realizes the so-called "Satantic Edition" is intended as satirel. Right??

yeah....seriously. they are taking this way too seriously

[Oldsoldier2003]

Im just waiting for thread closure now :lolflag:

Although I haven't finished reading the thread- there is really nothing to warrant closing the thread so far.

[Oldsoldier2003]

I work with the UbuntuCE project and anything listed under the 3RD PARTY SECTION ON THIS FORUMS IS OBVIOUSLY OFFICIAL. Sorry if this guy is an idiot but there is no Ubuntu Satanic Edition under 3rd Party on these forums are there?

I'm sure that this is a charged subject for you, but please refrain from calling folks idiots. The post could have been worded just as effectively without name calling.

Cheers,
OS

[parker13]

Ubuntu Satanic Edition is a satire.

Ubuntu Satanic Edition is fun.

Ubuntu Satanic Edition is actually pretty damn usable and a great alternative to the standard Ubuntu for people who like a dark desktop.

It also promotes freedom in music as well as software. It does this by including music licensed under Creative Commons, bringing raw, less commercial music to a wider audience and helping up-and-coming new bands. Imagine a free music CD containing Linux. The goal is to spread both Linux and heavy metal to a wider audience. If people are offended by that then I have pity for them.

[6r00k14n]

I had an email exchange with Lady Slave regarding this issue.The real reason is actually quite infantile.

http://ubuntusatanic.org/forum/comments.php?DiscussionID=63&page=1#Item_0

[Oldsoldier2003]

I would like such anti-freedom comments to be not posted.

I'm anti-anti-anti-freedom just for the simple fact that freedom means the freedom to disagree. This makes his anti-freedom comments just as postable as your anti-anti-freedom comments or my anti-anti-anti-freedome comments.

Who's on first?

[jespdj]

Ubuntu Satanic Edition is a stupid idea, just as stupid as Ubuntu Christian Edition and Ubuntu Muslim Edition.

Ubuntu has nothing to do with your religion, and religious groups are misusing Ubuntu for their propagandistic purposes.

In my opinion, Canonical and also DistroWatch should oppose any group which uses the name "Ubuntu" for their own propaganda that way.

Note: I'm not against anyone's religion. Believe whatever you want to believe. But do not misuse Ubuntu in this way please. Ubuntu does not have anything to do with your religion and should not be used for propaganda for any religion.

[Ms_Angel_D]

Ubuntu Satanic Edition is a stupid idea, just as stupid as Ubuntu Christian Edition and Ubuntu Muslim Edition.

Ubuntu has nothing to do with your religion, and religious groups are misusing Ubuntu for their propagandistic purposes.

In my opinion, Canonical and also DistroWatch should oppose any group which uses the name "Ubuntu" for their own propaganda that way.

Note: I'm not against anyone's religion. Believe whatever you want to believe. But do not misuse Ubuntu in this way please. Ubuntu does not have anything to do with your religion and should not be used for propaganda for any religion.


Actually Uubuntu SE has nothing to do with Satanism

Ubuntu SE is a Linux distribution based on Ubuntu. It brings together the best free software and free metal music on one CD.

So it's not even a religious thing, it's name for shock value like most things done in Metal

[CrazyArcher]

Satanic Edition was created as a humorous responce to Christian Edition and Muslim Edition. I don't think that software shuld have anything to do with religion, but if CE and ME have right to exist, there's no reason to discriminate SE. DistroWatch made a hypocritic step here, IMO.

[LaRoza]

From what I have seen on their website, the Satanic edition doesn't offer a means of studying Anton LaVey's bible, for example. It's just some graphics. So why would it be noteworthy enough to be listed as a distro?

No, it is deliberately not restricted to any philosophy.

Ubuntu Satanic Edition is a satire.

Ubuntu Satanic Edition is fun.

Ubuntu Satanic Edition is actually pretty damn usable and a great alternative to the standard Ubuntu for people who like a dark desktop.

It also promotes freedom in music as well as software. It does this by including music licensed under Creative Commons, bringing raw, less commercial music to a wider audience and helping up-and-coming new bands. Imagine a free music CD containing Linux. The goal is to spread both Linux and heavy metal to a wider audience. If people are offended by that then I have pity for them.
+1 I used to use it on GNOME when it was just .deb's (I once wanted to make a live cd with it as well during that time for fun) and I liked the theme and some screensavers. I tried out the live disk, it sure has gone far, but I don't use it anymore (I don't use any themable WM)

I'm anti-anti-anti-freedom just for the simple fact that freedom means the freedom to disagree. This makes his anti-freedom comments just as postable as your anti-anti-freedom comments or my anti-anti-anti-freedome comments.

Who's on first?

If I could, I'd ban you, but I can't, so I will ban someone else.

Ubuntu Satanic Edition is a stupid idea, just as stupid as Ubuntu Christian Edition and Ubuntu Muslim Edition.

Ubuntu has nothing to do with your religion, and religious groups are misusing Ubuntu for their propagandistic purposes.

Note: I'm not against anyone's religion. Believe whatever you want to believe. But do not misuse Ubuntu in this way please. Ubuntu does not have anything to do with your religion and should not be used for propaganda for any religion.

Ubuntu SE has nothing to do with religion. It is artwork and promotes free music and games. Ubuntu is based on Debian, do you protest the use of Debian to make a distro that has philosophical origins?

[gn2]

I'm anti-anti-anti-freedom just for the simple fact that freedom means the freedom to disagree. This makes his anti-freedom comments just as postable as your anti-anti-freedom comments or my anti-anti-anti-freedome comments.

Who's on first?

My comment wasn't anti-freedom, I just expressed my wish that some people would stop doing something.
Therefore you're not anti-anti-anti-freedom after all.
I'm perfectly OK with people doing the thing that I would like them to stop doing, it's just that I would prefer them to stop.
I haven't actually called on them to stop, nor would I.
Feel free to agree, you won't be the first though :)

[Yellow Stevens]

As a Christian, minister of religion etc, I have absolutely no problem with Ubuntu SE. Looks like some good artwork from the screenshots I've seen.

I can see the humour and the irony. I'm not sure it deserves to be called an edition though...it's more like a theme.

For the record I don't use Ubuntu CE. I think the wallpaper looks naff. It comes with Bible software, but I possess a Bible, a theological education and a brain so I don't use Bible software. As for parental controls, that is just a way of not parenting. If you want your kids not to look at something on the internet, you have to supervise them, not install some software and go and watch TV. Like SE, it seems to be more of a theme than an actual addition to the disro line up.

Christians are always trying to come up with alternatives to non-christian culture. So they have music, we have to have Christian music, they have video games we have to have Christian video games. This is just a way of avoiding the real world lest it challenge your beliefs.

Christianity is a religion. Music, video games and Operating systems do not follow religions. You can have a Christian person, but you can't have Christian anything else...including Ubuntu.

Take them both off DistroWatch neither of them are distros.

[sloggerkhan]

Has this been on digg or /.? Just curious (I don't use digg or /.) because it seems like it's arrousing interest.

[enlightenment now]

Saw this on their website and found it interesting:

Source - http://ubuntusatanic.org/news/banned-from-distrowatch/

What do you folks make of this? I don't use USE, but are people really that easily offended? Do you think the word "Satanic" has the power to strike fear into the conservative mind and scare people away at its mere utterance?

Seems pretty bloody stupid to me. I wouldn't really say it's a reflection of the Linux community at all but just the mindset of some people in general.

1. Sounds like great publicity for the distro to be banned.

2. Why not use Distropedia (http://www.cafelinux.org/distropedia/) anyway?

From the Distropedia website:

This website is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/).
Distropedia is a member only Open Content Collaborative Writing Project. So anybody, including the Satanic Edition Devs could join Distropedia and add an article about their distro, I notice the Dev of Ubuntu CE has done just that. So what are the Satanic Edition Devs waiting for?

[sloggerkhan]

I wasn't sure distropedia was still active.

[Orlsend]

Well the last time I saw the satanic version of Ubunutu it had Images for 18+, Having that kind of material in you site is not good for you SEO.

[enlightenment now]

I wasn't sure distropedia was still active.

Yep, alive and active it looks like it just needs contributors, like yourself. ;)

[Macintosh Sauce]

It's the question of censorship. How would you react to, say, Ubuntu Nazi edition? I'm not saying it's the same as satanic, but where do you draw the line?

Correction... Nazi = Satanic

[parker13]

Yep, alive and active it looks like it just needs contributors, like yourself. ;)

I've been trying to register with distropedia for the last couple of days. It says the email I registered with is now taken, but when I request a new password it says the email address doesn't exist!

[parker13]

Well the last time I saw the satanic version of Ubunutu it had Images for 18+, Having that kind of material in you site is not good for you SEO.

The images are not 18+ rated. Go into any art galley and you'll see much the same.

[Sand & Mercury]

Correction... Nazi = Satanic
That is entirely wrong

[jespdj]

Ubuntu is based on Debian, do you protest the use of Debian to make a distro that has philosophical origins?
I'm not sure I understand what you're asking. Which distro has what philosophical origins?

As far as I know do neither Debian nor Ubuntu make propaganda for any religion or other social ideological group.

Ok, I understand now that Ubuntu SE is not really about satanism as a religion. But why does it have to be a completely separate distro if the only difference is in the artwork?

[LaRoza]

I'm not sure I understand what you're asking. Which distro has what philosophical origins?

As far as I know do neither Debian nor Ubuntu make propaganda for any religion or other social ideological group.

Ubuntu has a very strongly professed idealology. Mostly humanistic, but a strong idealogy nontheless. (Hint, look at the default videos about Ubuntu in your home)


Ok, I understand now that Ubuntu SE is not really about satanism as a religion. But why does it have to be a completely separate distro if the only difference is in the artwork?

There are other differences. Why does OzOS have to be a separate distro? Why does Kubuntu? Why does Ubuntu need to be separate from Debian?

I think people latch on to the name for this, rather than having true thoughts.

[kindofabuzz]

no such thing as satan. just some emo kids trying to be cool or something by creating the satanic version.

[ikt]

I don't believe Ubuntu SE should be listed but not because of the reasons noted by the distrowatch admin.

[Dr Small]

And as a satanist I am equally offended by Christianity.

I totally expected this. As Satan was cast down from heaven, I should expect he and his followers to hate those that do right. But, incase you did not realize, this is his ending:


And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand.
And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,
And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.
And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
Revelation 22:1-4

And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.
Revelation 20:10

And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.
Revelation 20:12

And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.
And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

Revelation 20:14,15

[LaRoza]

I totally expected this. As Satan was cast down from heaven, I should expect he and his followers to hate those that do right. But, incase you did not realize, this is his ending:

Dr. Small, "Satanic" doesn't mean "Christian". Odd to say, but if one believes in Satan as described by Christians, then they believe in Christ (just choosing not to follow Him).

In this respect, "Ubuntu Satanic Edition" is just the use of the word, not a homage to the actual fallen angel (which has many names)

Please keep this thread separate from any sort of religious debate and focused on Ubuntu derivatives (like Ubuntu SE/CE/ME) and distrowatch.

[Dr Small]

Dr. Small, "Satanic" doesn't mean "Christian".

I never said it did. But whatever, carry on with the subject at hand.

[kirsis]

I find it hypocritical that distrowatch has Devil-Linux listed (http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=devil)

(sorry if somebody has already pointed this out, long thread is long :))

[Vivaldi Gloria]

Please keep this thread separate from any sort of religious debate and focused on Ubuntu derivatives (like Ubuntu SE/CE/ME) and distrowatch.

Damn you are fast. Now I cannot post my answer. ;)

[6r00k14n]

I don't believe Ubuntu SE should be listed but not because of the reasons noted by the distrowatch admin.

Could you please provide at least one reason?

[Methuselah]

Are people really talking about the 'rights' of SE to be included in distrowatch?
What about the rights of distrowatch not to list Ubuntu SE?
It's more of a theme than a distro anyway.

[Vivaldi Gloria]

Are people really talking about the 'rights' of SE to be included in distrowatch?

Telling again: Sure he can do whatever he wants with his site. I'm not criticizing that. I'm criticizing his justification (the first one to be precise).

[Aviendha2008]

Well, that's torn it, Distropedia announces Ubuntu Hebrew Remix....http://www.cafelinux.org/distropedia/node/184


WHY?

Also, why is it not on Distrowatch ? Inquiring minds want to know...

[billgoldberg]

some people find clowns offensive.

You are right on the spot.

If they are starting with this offending bs, there is no end to it.

I myself are not offended by anything.

I put some question marks to some topics, but I would never be offended by another mans beliefs.

[swoll1980]

Distro watch would rather offend the 1% of the world that are satanic, than the 80% that are Christian, is this really that big of a deal? They're a business that makes money off advertising. Why risk loosing money over something so stupid?

[knix]

Consider that FOSS is about freedom of choice. The guy who runs Distrowach makes the choice to ban Ubuntu SE. People make the choice to not use distrowatch. I just choose to get information about distributions however practical- whether that be distrowatch, or somewhere else. That said, distrowatch never seemed particularly useful to me.

[parker13]

http://linuxtracker.org/index.php?page=torrents

"Ubuntu 8 04 i386 Christian Edition v4 0" - 26 downloads
"sidux 2008 02 erebos xfce i386" - 116 downloads
"Ubuntu Satanic Edition 666 4 i386" - 1148 downloads

The top two are listed on Distrowatch. There are many more examples.

[parker13]

Distrowatch is dead.

Long live Distropedia...


Ubuntu Satanic Edition on Distropedia (http://cafelinux.org/distropedia/node/197)

[EdThaSlayer]

Just hearing about this edition makes me want to rot in the depths of hell. I'm atheists, so yeah, pretty cool that they have a distribution like this around, truly shows the freedom in the Linux world and how respectful we are of eachothers cultures or beliefs.:) But from reading the comments in this thread I think otherwise. :(

[caravel]

Distro watch would rather offend the 1% of the world that are satanic, than the 80% that are Christian, is this really that big of a deal? They're a business that makes money off advertising. Why risk loosing money over something so stupid?

*sigh* It's Satanist, not "Satanic". Satanic implies "Satanic themed", "Satanic in appearance", etc. Satanist, would be a follower of a Satanic cult. Big difference. Ubuntu SE is not a religious distribution, which is always a good thing. I don't think it takes itself that seriously.

Would an Ubuntu "Diabolic[al] Edition" upset anyone (as it means the same thing)? Does anyone have a problem with the FreeBSD mascot? Personally I think the GNU logo looks a bit like old Nick (on a good day) as well.

I agree that a Clown related Ubuntu would be much more disturbing by the way.

[jespdj]

Ubuntu has a very strongly professed idealology. Mostly humanistic, but a strong idealogy nontheless. (Hint, look at the default videos about Ubuntu in your home)
I saw the video with Mandela, but he is just explaining what the word "Ubuntu" means, which is (more or less) being hospitable, care for other people etc. In my opinion it is not propaganda for humanism or any religion. The word "Ubuntu" isn't exlusively a humanistic term. As far as I know there is no religious ideology behind Ubuntu Linux. If there is, then can you tell me more about it?

Distro watch would rather offend the 1% of the world that are satanic, than the 80% that are Christian...
Do you think that 80% of the world is Christian? Fortunately that's not true.

[matthekc]

perhaps it personally offends the distrowatch admin/team?

While I wouldn't care if I saw someone else run it I certainly would not run SE my family is religious I'd never hear the end of it. Evil edition maybe why not Evil edition you really seem to be limiting yourself with
Satan one little red man can only be so evil.

Also ballory girl is a really nice pic

[enlightenment now]

Well, that's torn it, Distropedia announces Ubuntu Hebrew Remix....http://www.cafelinux.org/distropedia/node/184


WHY?

Also, why is it not on Distrowatch ? Inquiring minds want to know...






Why not?

http://linuxtracker.org/index.php?page=torrents

"Ubuntu 8 04 i386 Christian Edition v4 0" - 26 downloads
"sidux 2008 02 erebos xfce i386" - 116 downloads
"Ubuntu Satanic Edition 666 4 i386" - 1148 downloads

The top two are listed on Distrowatch. There are many more examples.

Very, very good point...It appears more people have an appreciation for art.

Distrowatch is dead.

Long live Distropedia...


Ubuntu Satanic Edition on Distropedia (http://cafelinux.org/distropedia/node/197)



parker13, I just read your article on Ubuntu Satanic Edition on Distropedia (http://cafelinux.org/distropedia/node/197), it looks like a pretty awesome distro. The art work is first class, much like what I have seen at the Smithsonian or the Gugenheim, also it sounds like you have an awesome line up of Heavy Metal music.

Interesting to note that on Distropedia there are artciles written by both the Ubuntu Christian Edition (http://www.cafelinux.org/distropedia/node/152) Dev and the Ubuntu Satanic Edition (http://www.cafelinux.org/distropedia/node/196) Dev, there is even an article for the Ubuntu Hebrew Edition (http://www.cafelinux.org/distropedia/node/183).

I encourage the Ubuntu Muslim Edition people to add their article, or maybe parker13 can add it or one of the other Distropedia contributors.

The openess at Distropedia brings shame to both DistroWatch and Wikipedia.

parker13 Thank you for making such a beautiful work of art known as the Ubuntu Satanic Edition, I look forward to trying it.

[dagoth_pie]

Now then, I'll try my best to explain this...

Before you read on to the next paragraph, two things, first, I'm a 16 year old, Christian guy, second, think about this, bring up every stereotype and imagine what I'm like, what the church I attend is like

Now I'll describe what it is in reality with just enough detail for you to see how wrong you steriotype of me is, I have long hair and almost always wear black, I listen to metal (mostly Disturbed and Dragonforce), the church I go to is an old theatre, it has a stage up the front with, drum, bass, keyboard, your average church setup... halfway to the back, we have our sound desk, where we control the 16 sound channels, and all our pretty flashing lights (my job :lolflag:) we also have an old pentium 3 pc running Ubuntu 8.04 there to record the sermon...

Now then, is that how you would imagine a church? Maybe the contrast between stereotypes of Christianity and what some churches are like can point out to everyone, that sometimes people dont think things are what they are, for example, I've met people(mostly 14-15 year old guys) who claimed to be satanists, just because the think it makes them cool and I've also met people who denied it, but were drug smoking, chicken slaughtering, demon worshiping weirdos,(true story) I as a Christian aren't even slightly offended by the idea of a satanic edition of Ubuntu, but that doesn't apply to everyone, thats why they're worried about people getting offended, cos lets face it some old Christian ladies have nothing better to do with their time than complain :lolflag:

[parker13]

Now then, I'll try my best to explain this...

Before you read on to the next paragraph, two things, first, I'm a 16 year old, Christian guy, second, think about this, bring up every stereotype and imagine what I'm like, what the church I attend is like

Now I'll describe what it is in reality with just enough detail for you to see how wrong you steriotype of me is, I have long hair and almost always wear black, I listen to metal (mostly Disturbed and Dragonforce), the church I go to is an old theatre, it has a stage up the front with, drum, bass, keyboard, your average church setup... halfway to the back, we have our sound desk, where we control the 16 sound channels, and all our pretty flashing lights (my job :lolflag:) we also have an old pentium 3 pc running Ubuntu 8.04 there to record the sermon...


Sounds like a cool church. Maybe we could feature some of your music on a future release of SE. If it's anything like the latest Disturbed album then it will be worth a listen. Consider licensing your music under Creative Commons so that it can be freely distributed, but still attributed to yourselves.

[dagoth_pie]

Sounds like a cool church. Maybe we could feature some of your music on a future release of SE. If it's anything like the latest Disturbed album then it will be worth a listen. Consider licensing your music under Creative Commons so that it can be freely distributed, but still attributed to yourselves.

haha, I like you attitude, maybe we should work on a "can't we all just get along edition", although you've just made me wonder, what do Christian songwriters use to liscence their songs? I should look into that, maybe some of the offering should be getting paid in royalties :lolflag:

Sadly not much of it is as good as Disturbed... if it was I'd have no need for it... although some worship music isn't half bad...

[matthekc]

@ parker13 would it be possible to download just the wicked cool music (some pun intended). I went to the site and followed the link to the music ep but it didn't seem to work I got a 404 not found.

[cmat]

I thought that distro was created as a parody of CE and all the religious editions. Free software, free speech.

[dagoth_pie]

I thought that distro was created as a parody of CE and all the religious editions. Free software, free speech.

Who knows, although it makes sence... although not being "bigoted" or anything, it really would have saved this argument if they called it the metal edition or something... hmm, I might make a matrix edition, where everything is displayed in 8 digit binary sequences instead of letters...

[toupeiro]

Personally,

I think its just ridiculous grounds all the way around. You can take "ubuntu" and add all the wallpapers, sounds, and colors you want to it to make it "christian" or "muslim" or "satanic", on your own without having to have an official "satanic" distro. The Satanic edition, from what I've read, was not made because of a calling of users who practiced satanism, it was done in frustration in response to other religious versions. Kind of a silly reason to do it IMO.

I don't stock any faith in satanism, from a spiritual or theological standpoint, and most certainly from a state of practice. I've read many things by Anton LaVey and Vincent Crowley, and seen pictures of what they do. In my teenage years, I followed very extensively the expressions of satanism in the early 90's in Norway through Black Metal. I've read what bands like Mayhem and frontmen like Euronymous, Count Grishnackh, Atilla and many more have done in the name of satanism, which are still celebrated today. I have many of their albums. Sorry, I don't have much of a place for that in my life. I appreciate some of it musically, but thats about as far as I take it. Stating only my own opinion, there is usually a general sense of morality in people who were not overly exposed to traumatic or in contrast to averages, extreme conditions, that the message shared in satanism that I was exposed to, I simply don't mesh well with. I looked at it with an open mind, and that was enough for me to know when to walk away. I'm not saying it doesn't have its place, that I think all people who practice it are bad, or anything of the sort, but I could really care less about distrowatch banning the distro. Frankly, I do think they should ban all religious based distros IF they ban satanism, but they didn't and its the owners prerogative to do whatever he wants with his site. Now, if he banned all ubuntu based distributions BECAUSE there was a satanic one and Shuttleworth did nothing abut it, then yeah, I'd say he went too far, but I am sure he doesn't care at all what I think, and thats fine. I don't really care which distro gets downloaded the most anyway. :P

I refuse to get into debates of where one religious stance is ultimately right, and another is ultimately wrong. I know what works for me, and what I believe, and as long as you don't impose on me, I won't impose on you. Whether or not you agree or not is about as worrisome to me as a cloudy day. Just, give me my technology without religion please. Thank you, drive through!

[LaRoza]

I never said it did. But whatever, carry on with the subject at hand.

I mean, "Satan" in your view is a specific concept/being, defined by your beliefs. Someone who is not Christian would not think of Satan as the same thing. For example, in the Church of Satan, Satan isn't a being at all (the group is entirely atheist) and the use of the term is not the same (from their point of view) as the Christian.

So "Satanic" != "Satanic Christian" in all uses of the adjective.

[dagoth_pie]

I think that the CE has things like lyrics projection programs and stuff to help make things easier in a church, as for the others, who knows...

Although, just cos I like jokes heres one...

One day a group of scientists got together and decided that man had come a long way and no longer needed God. So they picked one scientist to go and tell Him that they were done with Him.

The scientist walked up to God and said, "God, we've decided that we no longer need you. We're to the point that we can clone people and do many miraculous things, so why don't you just go on and get lost."

God listened very patiently and kindly to the man and after the scientist was done talking, God said, "Very well, how about this, let's say we have a man making contest." To which the scientist replied, "OK, great!"

But God added, "Now, we're going to do this just like I did back in the old days with Adam."

The scientist said, "Sure, no problem" and bent down and grabbed himself a handful of dirt.

God just looked at him and said, "No, no, no. You go get your own dirt!"
:lolflag:
Just to point out that even science can't disprove the existence of the supernatural, take the big bang theory for example, you still end up with the question of, where did that little ball of matter come from anyway?

Also, as far as I am aware, the earliest mention of satan is in the Bible, where he is portrayed as evil, things like "the Dragon" for example, although this still isn't just cause for anyone to "judge a book by it's cover" so to speak. So in conclusion, the name Satan is a registered trademark of God, and means if God says he's evil then according to clause infinity as set out in the Bilble, you have the choice as to weather or not to believe, suit yourselves, I don't care!!! I like Dragonforce because they have (IMHO) the best music in the world!! and im not about to hate them just because in the Bible, Satan is refered to as a dragon(probably the earliest recorded reference to a dragon(of course then you have to take into account that the Bible was written in Hebrew and translated to English, so dragon could have meant anything)...

and wow, I've even gotten myself frustrated here, God why did you have to make this so complicated???

EDIT: I almost forgot my original point, how we percieve things all comes down to our opinions, which changes depending on our life experiences, things we've read on the internet and all that good stuff... so pretty much, any attempt to justify anything in this particular thread is futile... hmm, if thats the case why am i even here? probably because it's all kinda funny when you think about it

[Vivaldi Gloria]

Just to point out that even science can't disprove the existence of the supernatural,

No one can also disprove that the universe is created by the flying spaghetti monster. But there is as much evidence suggesting this story as the christian story - namely zero - no evidence whatsoever.

question of, where did that little ball of matter come from anyway?

What little ball of matter? Big bang theory pretty much says that time and matter got created along with big bang. But how is this related?

Also, as far as I am aware, the earliest mention of satan is in the Bible,

Nope. Pretty much everything in bible is from much earlier myths, especially sumerian.

how we percieve things all comes down to our opinions,

other factors are also important like upbringing, education, knowledge etc. But this thread is not about opinions, it's about respecting others opinions.

[dagoth_pie]

No one can also disprove that the universe is created by the flying spaghetti monster. But there is as much evidence suggesting this story as the christian story - namely zero - no evidence whatsoever.
exactly my point, it's anyones guess



What little ball of matter? Big bang theory pretty much says that time and matter got created along with big bang. But how is this related?
As far as I'm aware(a physics teacher back at high school said, so possibly not accurate) the theory is that all the matter in the univers was originally in a small ball of unstable matter that one day exploded and thats how the univers was created, but then, it's just a theory, so there can be many versions, just like theres many versions of supernatural beings creating everything, theres no way to prove it


Nope. Pretty much everything in bible is from much earlier myths, especially sumerian.
Much less published myths, I mot exactly a Bible scholar, but like I said, as far as I'm aware, I know that mention of Satan starts in Genisis which is thousands of years old, but I'll admit when it comes to other religions stories of creation I do dismiss them, but I don't know theres just something different about Christianity


other factors are also important like upbringing, education, knowledge etc. But this thread is not about opinions, it's about respecting others opinions.
Thats what I meant by all that other good stuff, but think about this for a second, just humor me, If I were to say I had heard God speak, you could either, dismiss it as being impossible and im making it up because I'm crazy, or you could agree with me, that theres no way of anyone being able to prove it one way or the other

This is why I hate chess, I always get into a stalemate...

[fiddledd]

If I were to say I had heard God speak, you could either, dismiss it as being impossible and im making it up because I'm crazy, or you could agree with me, that theres no way of anyone being able to prove it one way or the other

I could change the word "God" for "fairies at the bottom of my garden".

Same outcome, you couldn't prove it one way or another.:)

[dagoth_pie]

Exactly, imagine how boring the world would get if you could actually prove anything like this, hmm this really is an interesting turn for this thread to have taken... :lolflag:

[Miguel]

I shouldn't probably get into this but... oh well...

In maths, whenever you accept a number of statements as true, then you will arrive to a situation where some affirmations can't be proved either way. Please note you need those truths (axioms), such as 1 being bigger than 2. As an example, imagine a bag big enough to contain all natural numbers (1, 2, 3 and so on) and another bag big enough to contain all real numbers (the former plus pi, e, 0.27, square root of 2 and so on). If I remember correctly, it is unprovable if there is "a bag" bigger than the "natural bag" but smaller than the "real bag". I think this is Russell's paradox.

In physics, something that is unprovable and untangible I'd say it's irrelevant (see the spaghetti flying monster). Also, many people use the word theory very lightly, meaning hypothesis. A theory is something that can explain the current situation and is able to make predictions. The big bang is a theory because it can explain the current state of affairs, can explain the broken symmetry we live in and in principle can explain how the universe can expand. Please note that it is a bit difficult to make a theory with only one experiment (only one universe).

For example, the Standard Model is a model (oh really?), because it phenomenologically establishes the masses of certain particles. There are too many parametres for this to be considered a decent theory, even if it can explain more stuff that you can imagine.

I'd bore you to death with this stuff, but I have to go, since party is calling me.

BTW: I laughed a lot when I discovered Ubuntu Satanic.

[6r00k14n]

If I were to say I had heard God speak, you could either, dismiss it as being impossible and im making it up because I'm crazy, or you could agree with me, that theres no way of anyone being able to prove it one way or the other

That you cannot prove it, doesn't means that the burden of disproving it falls on me. With nothing proven, what is there to disprove? Once there is testable evidence (not anecdotal) then anyone who chooses to disprove your statement assumes the burden.

[buntunub]

Saw this on their website and found it interesting:

Source - http://ubuntusatanic.org/news/banned-from-distrowatch/

What do you folks make of this?

1. Satanism is a recognized world religion. Offensive to some perhaps, yet all in a free society have the right to practice whatever religion suits them. Fair is fair, and if the Christians and Muslims are allowed to tout their religious names on Ubuntu and be allowed to be listed on Distrowatch, then Satanic edition has every right to be there as well.

2. Distrowatch is a privately owned website, not bound by any international laws that dictate to Ladislav what Linux Distros he can or cannot list on his site. It is entirely his choice what goes on it. He is well known to toss about very controversial and inflammatory stories and it seems to me, that he is doing this for the PR value it will bring him.

[starcannon]

Saw this on their website and found it interesting:

Source - http://ubuntusatanic.org/news/banned-from-distrowatch/

What do you folks make of this? I don't use USE, but are people really that easily offended? Do you think the word "Satanic" has the power to strike fear into the conservative mind and scare people away at its mere utterance?

Seems pretty bloody stupid to me. I wouldn't really say it's a reflection of the Linux community at all but just the mindset of some people in general.

I think the folks that compiled "Satanic Edition" got exactly what they were wanting, FINALLY someone has sensationalized them. The only way I would be "outraged" would be if it were an obviously legitimate religious edition. If that were the case I would object strongly to the reasons given by the website; not because I'm a "Satanist", I actually try to avoid being any sort of "ist" or attending any sorts of "ism", I digress, its because as long as the Ubuntu brand is going to be allowed to be associated with other religions, then it probably should be allowed for all. And as long as distro-watch is willing to acknowledge these other religious distro's then they to should be acknowledging all religious distro's.

Okay, now that I've said my bit on that; as it stands, "Satanic Edition" has always come across to me as a tongue in cheek anti religious joke, I have never personally considered it to be a true religious compilation of Satanic related apps and spiritual tools, and as such has always recieved the "oh the guy with the hand buzzer at the door" kind of attention. /shrug... I could be clear wrong though, what the hell do I know about Satanism?(zilch, zero, zip, nadda).

[cardinals_fan]

Much less published myths, I mot exactly a Bible scholar, but like I said, as far as I'm aware, I know that mention of Satan starts in Genisis which is thousands of years old, but I'll admit when it comes to other religions stories of creation I do dismiss them, but I don't know theres just something different about Christianity
"There's just something different about Christianity" probably because you were raised believing it. I'm not you, so I can't be sure, but most people believe it because they were taught (or indoctrinated, depending on one's point of view) with those beliefs from a young age.

I'm not religious, but, if I were, I would probably believe something similar to the Navajo religion. Not a clear religion in and of itself, but more a concept of life. This (http://www.xpressweb.com/zionpark/index3.html) is a pretty good summary.

[LaRoza]

1. Satanism is a recognized world religion. Offensive to some perhaps, yet all in a free society have the right to practice whatever religion suits them. Fair is fair, and if the Christians and Muslims are allowed to tout their religious names on Ubuntu and be allowed to be listed on Distrowatch, then Satanic edition has every right to be there as well.


Ubuntu SE isn't affiliated with the Church of Satan.

It doesn't profess belief or endorsement of any version of satanic beliefs. It stands alone (albeit, with its devs and users)

[t0p]

I'll admit when it comes to other religions stories of creation I do dismiss them, but I don't know theres just something different about Christianity


Yeah? You think Christianity contains some great cosmic truth that just can't be dismissed? LOL!

I checked out the feature list (http://ubuntuce.com/features.htm) of Ubuntu Christian Edition, and apart from some Bible Study software and a Virtual Rosary(!!!) there isn't much to distinguish it from regular ubuntu. Except for the artwork. And the Holy Spirit. LOL!

[t0p]

I've read many things by Anton LaVey and Vincent Crowley, and seen pictures of what they

Really? Pray tell, what have you read by "Vincent Crowley"?

Nothing, I'll bet. Cos the guy you're thinking of was called Aleister Crowley. You really should try and read those google pages more carefully...

[enlightenment now]

Ubuntu Satanic Edition (http://ubuntusatanic.org/) is not evil at all it is simply a work of art, a very well done work of art.

Now Whitebuntu (http://www.whitebuntu.org/) is a fine example of human ignorance and could be considered evil, if not then just plain dumb, or a joke done in very poor taste.

[swoll1980]

Do you think that 80% of the world is Christian? Fortunately that's not true.

I didn't really mean Christian, non satanic would have been a better word. My apologies.

[Canis familiaris]

Distro watch would rather offend the 1% of the world that are satanic, than the 80% that are Christian, is this really that big of a deal? They're a business that makes money off advertising. Why risk loosing money over something so stupid?

This begs the question: Do Christians *really* get offended by Satanism or indeed the Ubuntu Satanic Edition?

I think the SE was released as humour in a Response to the CE

[swoll1980]

This begs the question: Do Christians *really* get offended by Satanism or indeed the Ubuntu Satanic Edition?

I think the SE was released as humour in a Response to the CE

The question really is does Distro watch believe it's sponsors would believe Christians *really* get offended by Satanism or indeed the Ubuntu Satanic Edition, and is it worth the risk? Money is always the reason for any decision a business makes(a smart business anyways).

[jespdj]

Now Whitebuntu (http://www.whitebuntu.org/) is a fine example of human ignorance and could be considered evil, if not then just plain dumb, or a joke done in very poor taste.
Whitebuntu? Appalling. I really hope that it's a very bad and tasteless joke. :mad:

Canonical should really oppose this, whether it is serious or a joke.

[eragon100]

Whitebuntu! What's going to be next HeilBuntu?? :mad:

Canconical should shut this down. NOW. I am going to send them an email :mad:

Their forum seems to have a little spam problem: http://www.whitebuntu.org/punbb/viewforum.php?id=4

[Canis familiaris]

Their forum seems to have a little spam problem: http://www.whitebuntu.org/punbb/viewforum.php?id=4
Or is it a Spam itself? :lolflag:

[simtaalo]

that whitebuntu is mad, looking at their blog and an email convo between them and the maker of satanic edition

Ubuntu Satanic Edition’s creator, Garry, responded to our extremely polite and good-natured post

Hey, we just noticed your Ubuntu distribution. We here at Whitebuntu linux were wondering if you would add a link to our site, as another distribution of Ubuntu. Thanks, and keep up the good work,
The Whitebuntu Team

with a nasty and completely incomprehensible position:

White Supremacist Ubuntu? What’s next, a kkkubuntu variant? I can’t think of anything worse. If you think I’m linking your site then you can swivel on your swastikkkas.

How can someone who started and continues to develop Ubuntu Satanic Edition seriously look down on our distribution?? I think in anyone’s eyes, Satan-worship is far worse then a little bit of racial isolationism. We just want to do what we want with who we want; our friend Garry, to whom we were trying to offer our support, supports Satan and yet believes our position is wrong. I know I won’t be using Ubuntu SE, and we certainly won’t be allowing him to develop a Whitebuntu SE unless we receive a formal apology and explanation of his actions.

satanism much worse than a "little" racial isolationism, i hope they are joking.

[Vivaldi Gloria]

satanism much worse than a "little" racial isolationism, i hope they are joking.

This is the sickest sentence I've read in this thread.

It looks like you're not only happy to force your religious views on other people but you have no problem in segregating people of different race or colour.

Guess which one of them is illegal? Satanism or Racial discrimination? Can you understand why?

[Canis familiaris]

This is the sickest sentence I've read in this thread.

It looks like you're not only happy to force your religious views on other people but you have no problem in segregating people of different race or colour.

Guess which one of them is illegal? Satanism or Racial discrimination? Can you understand why?

I think you misunderstood him/her. She/He said:
satanism much worse than a "little" racial isolationism, i hope they are joking.
Note the bold text.

[Vivaldi Gloria]

I think you misunderstood him/her. She/He said:

Note the bold text.

In that case I'm really sorry and I apologize. I confused to whom "they" refers to.

Thanks for pointing out Anurag_panda.

[parker13]

@ parker13 would it be possible to download just the wicked cool music (some pun intended). I went to the site and followed the link to the music ep but it didn't seem to work I got a 404 not found.

You can get the EP by installing the "music-for-the-damned" package:

sudo apt-get install music-for-the-damned

The songs go into a folder under /var/music

Just import them into your favourite music player from there.

[Vivaldi Gloria]

The songs go into a folder under /var/music


Actually

~$ dpkg -L music-for-the-damned
/.
/usr
/usr/share
/usr/share/doc
/usr/share/doc/music-for-the-damned
/usr/share/doc/music-for-the-damned/copyright
/usr/share/doc/music-for-the-damned/changelog.gz
/usr/share/music
/usr/share/music/Music_for_the_Damned
/usr/share/music/Music_for_the_Damned/04 - Overcome.ogg
/usr/share/music/Music_for_the_Damned/03 - Infantry.ogg
/usr/share/music/Music_for_the_Damned/06 - Predator.ogg
/usr/share/music/Music_for_the_Damned/07 - The Ambassador Of Death.ogg
/usr/share/music/Music_for_the_Damned/cover.jpg
/usr/share/music/Music_for_the_Damned/05 - Rotten Inside.ogg
/usr/share/music/Music_for_the_Damned/02 - The Successor.ogg
/usr/share/music/Music_for_the_Damned/01 - Death Assembly.ogg

[Wiebelhaus]

We should all contact Distrowatch and inform them of how stupid this is , regardless of the distro makers opinion on anything.

[noneofthem]

I think the decision to ban Ubuntu Satanic Edition from Distrowatch was wrong. There is nothing wrong about this product. People might as well be bothered by the Muslim or Christian Edition. The "Satanic Edition" abviously is not there to harm anyone. It just features a different artwork and there is nothing worse than on most heavy metal album covers. I think this is a joke. They should really reinstate the distro. It would be a different story if there was a "Racist Edition" or something like that. That one should really be banned then but not this "Satanic" Edition...

[LaRoza]

This begs the question: Do Christians *really* get offended by Satanism or indeed the Ubuntu Satanic Edition?

No. God may (for Satanism), but that is not our beef.


I think the SE was released as humour in a Response to the CE
I don't think it was. It is some fine art, and its packages are nice.

[dagoth_pie]

Yeah? You think Christianity contains some great cosmic truth that just can't be dismissed? LOL!

I checked out the feature list (http://ubuntuce.com/features.htm) of Ubuntu Christian Edition, and apart from some Bible Study software and a Virtual Rosary(!!!) there isn't much to distinguish it from regular ubuntu. Except for the artwork. And the Holy Spirit. LOL!

As far as I know the CE is supposed to come preinstalled with applications that you would use in a church, lyrics projection and stuff, its not really something that I care about, the same can be achieved almost as easily as with Ubuntu just installing the extra packages. Please don't mock, so I'm pretty sure topics like this aren't supposed to be discussed for the sole reason that it ends up swinging that way, so if we're going to talk about it, lets keep it civilized and mature shall we?

Also, cardinals_fan as for being raised in a Christian background, you have a good point, but in a lot of cases it can be dismissed, because in my case, I was raised in a Christian background, but generally when your abused as a child in the name of holy punishment(my mum married a guy with a serious anger problem), you do tend to doubt God, but actually most of what makes me believe in God has happened over the past few years, for example, a travelling pastor/book salesman, who was speaking in our church last night, decided to prophesy over people at random (me being one of them and I can assure you if its a hoax, I wasn't in on it), he talked about the people as if hed known them for years, in fact he brought up things about one older lady, where shed had cancer that had shriveled up when she prayed about it(sure we can call the misdiagnosis or coincidence or whatever, lets not get into that) but he actually sortof indirectly mentioned it, sortof like a psycic i suppose, but in an actual believable way, although really its something that only one person themselves can decide weather or not to believe, if someone asked me to prove God was real, I'd tell them to go somewhere completly alone, and ask him, lol, then theyd get and answer or they wouldn't, simple as that, no arguments over it...

As for Whitebuntu, I do have to say the even in my opinion it sounds like its worse than SE, I don't know if it's what it sounds like, but if it is pro-racisim then it is definatley worse, people should have the sence to at least keep their racisim to themselves if thats how they feel, otherwise you end up with countries where anyone with more than a tan can get away with stealing just by accusing people of being racist (seriously, that ones from personall experience as well)

EDIT:
Geez, someone really does have to have a complete lack of a life to actually bother making a racist distro, seriously, what is the point?

[cardinals_fan]

Whitebuntu is meant as a joke, but, quite frankly, it's NOT FUNNY.

[simtaalo]

In that case I'm really sorry and I apologize. I confused to whom "they" refers to.

Thanks for pointing out Anurag_panda.

i was referring to the quote before the comma from the whitebuntu people and meaning "i really hope they are joking".

[dagoth_pie]

Whitebuntu is meant as a joke, but, quite frankly, it's NOT FUNNY.

I second that(or 24th it or whatever we're up to), jokes are fun to the point where you put a half empty can of demon energy drink on the doorstep of someone you know is overly religious, hehe, good times...

[Vivaldi Gloria]

i was referring to the quote before the comma from the whitebuntu people and meaning "i really hope they are joking".

simtaalo,

I'm really sorry for the misunderstanding. ](*,) Please forget about it.

[6r00k14n]

Whitebuntu is meant as a joke, but, quite frankly, it's NOT FUNNY.

I don't think that a swastika-inspired logo, a racially charged "mission statement", and inquiries as to the racial make up of a project's developers are a joke.

Considering the minds behind this "joke" are being saturated by beer funnels (the picture they proudly display on their page), I highly doubt that these same minds are clever enough to come up with this in jest. The only thing worse than when someone jokes about this kind of stuff is when they aren't joking.

That said, I certainly would not complain if they got listed on Distrowatch, but if they want to go and expound on the benefits of racial separatism, they should not seek to be listed on one of the most widely used resources of information about Linux, or at the very least, don't post a picture of yourselves on your homepage. Superior race, my foot!

[Darkade]

Satanic Edition is not even a distro is a series of themes for Ubuntu

[parker13]

Actually

~$ dpkg -L music-for-the-damned
/.
/usr
/usr/share
/usr/share/doc
/usr/share/doc/music-for-the-damned
/usr/share/doc/music-for-the-damned/copyright
/usr/share/doc/music-for-the-damned/changelog.gz
/usr/share/music
/usr/share/music/Music_for_the_Damned
/usr/share/music/Music_for_the_Damned/04 - Overcome.ogg
/usr/share/music/Music_for_the_Damned/03 - Infantry.ogg
/usr/share/music/Music_for_the_Damned/06 - Predator.ogg
/usr/share/music/Music_for_the_Damned/07 - The Ambassador Of Death.ogg
/usr/share/music/Music_for_the_Damned/cover.jpg
/usr/share/music/Music_for_the_Damned/05 - Rotten Inside.ogg
/usr/share/music/Music_for_the_Damned/02 - The Successor.ogg
/usr/share/music/Music_for_the_Damned/01 - Death Assembly.ogg


You're right. Sorry. I must have been *really* tired last night!

[6r00k14n]

Satanic Edition is not even a distro is a series of themes for Ubuntu

That was mostly true, until SE's developer remastered cd's for both the X86 and X86_64 archs. It also includes music and the eternity screensaver.

However, if adding or changing themes is not enough to justify recognition as a distro (even after a remaster) then:

a) why is changing a window manager acceptable (i.e. Kubuntu, Xubuntu, Fluxbuntu, Crunchbang), and

b) Parsix, CentOS, and Epidemic are not distros, according to your reasoning.

OK, maybe Parsix and Epidemic are actually distros (I don't know what else goes into their development, besides locale settings and artwork), but CentOS is RHEL with all trademarks removed, yet I'm sure you acknowledge its status as a distro.

[Canis familiaris]

whitebuntu is meant as a joke, but, quite frankly, it's not funny.

+1

[Dragonbite]

OK, maybe Parsix and Epidemic are actually distros (I don't know what else goes into their development, besides locale settings and artwork), but CentOS is RHEL with all trademarks removed, yet I'm sure you acknowledge its status as a distro.

Actually CentOS has made a few changes more than just Trademark, such as including Yum package manager (RHEL used to only have up2date and RPM while CentOS include up2date, RPM and Yum) and running GCC 4.? while RHEL ran GCC 3.? for backward compatibility.

I hear RHEL now includes Yum, so I'm not sure how different CentOS and RHEL are at this point anymore.

[cardinals_fan]

That was mostly true, until SE's developer remastered cd's for both the X86 and X86_64 archs. It also includes music and the eternity screensaver.

However, if adding or changing themes is not enough to justify recognition as a distro (even after a remaster) then:

a) why is changing a window manager acceptable (i.e. Kubuntu, Xubuntu, Fluxbuntu, Crunchbang), and

b) Parsix, CentOS, and Epidemic are not distros, according to your reasoning.

OK, maybe Parsix and Epidemic are actually distros (I don't know what else goes into their development, besides locale settings and artwork), but CentOS is RHEL with all trademarks removed, yet I'm sure you acknowledge its status as a distro.
In my opinion, the difference between a distro and a remaster is repositories. When an OS has its own repos, it becomes a distro. Otherwise, it's just a remaster.

[Sand & Mercury]

We can pretty safely draw a line to say if it's flat-out illegal in its content, a distro has no real grounds to expect support. If, for example, we had someone happy to make Paedobuntu, the Ubuntu for paedophiles around the world. There's nothing illegal about Satanic Edition at all. It's not even about Satanism.

[6r00k14n]

In my opinion, the difference between a distro and a remaster is repositories. When an OS has its own repos, it becomes a distro. Otherwise, it's just a remaster.

I guess it's a distro!

deb http://ubuntusatanic.org/hell hardy main
deb-src http://ubuntusatanic.org/hell hardy main

[cardinals_fan]

I guess it's a distro!

deb http://ubuntusatanic.org/hell hardy main
deb-src http://ubuntusatanic.org/hell hardy main
I should have been more specific. A distro uses its own repos for all software installation. SE has a repo for its theme etc., but when you install, say, links, it comes from the Ubuntu repos.

[6r00k14n]

I should have been more specific. A distro uses its own repos for all software installation. SE has a repo for its theme etc., but when you install, say, links, it comes from the Ubuntu repos.

Then Kubuntu, Xubuntu, CE, ME, Fluxbuntu, Protech-One, Crunchbang, Greenie, KiwiLinux and the list (excluding LinuxMint and possibly Ultimate Edition) could go on are not distros, because (according to you) they do not have their "own repos for all software installation."

[cardinals_fan]

Then Kubuntu, Xubuntu, CE, ME, Fluxbuntu, Protech-One, Crunchbang, Greenie, KiwiLinux and the list (excluding LinuxMint and possibly Ultimate Edition) could go on are not distros, because (according to you) they do not have their "own repos for all software installation."
Precisely. None of those actually are distros - they all depend on Ubuntu.

[modmadmike]

yeah....seriously. they are taking this way too seriously

Definatly

[LaRoza]

Precisely. None of those actually are distros - they all depend on Ubuntu.

Ubuntu depends on Debian.

[enlightenment now]

Precisely. None of those actually are distros - they all depend on Ubuntu.

Ubuntu depends on Debian.

Under cardinals_fan's reasoning would this make Ubuntu NOT a Distro?
:lolflag:

[LaRoza]

Under cardinals_fan's reasoning would this make Ubuntu NOT a Distro?


Yes. As cardinals_fan has I think given the rank of distro to Ubuntu, logic needs to be revised.

(I don't think there is a single line of distro/non-distro)

[6r00k14n]

Under cardinals_fan's reasoning would this make Ubuntu NOT a Distro?
:lolflag:

No. Actually, under cardinals_fan's reasoning, Ubuntu is a distro because it has its own repo, but Kubuntu is not because it uses Ubuntu's repo and SE is not because its repo only has the themes, wallpaper, and music packages.

I think the logic is flawed at best, and at worst, I think he/she has drunk to much of the Kool-Aid, but at the very least, cardinals_fan is consistent, which I respect. If SE is not a distro on this basis, then neither is Kubuntu.

[neighborlee]

I'm no Satanist either but still, do you think that justifies its exclusion?

In a world where so many people strive for hope amidst turmoil, despair and hunger etc., what exactly is the incentive to put forth an agenda diametrically opposed to say, most every other religion on the planet,- all whom for the most part exhude a ideology that we are to love god, and love our neighbor as ourselves ( treat others with respect ) ?

Where is the logic therefore in having anything to do with a entity that opposes God ? ( whom stands for love, and is the creator of our known universe ) I think while people were drumming up ideas to support things opposed to love and kindness, that they forgot to consider whether they should ( whats the point, and whom does it serve ?). I realize people are upset with the status of our world, but aren't there better ways of expressing it that benefit everyone in a constructive non violent way ? ;)

Come on now, I really thought we had come a very long ways from the days when people were burned at the stake , and when people wore sillly little white hats and paraded around fluffing their egotism and hate mongering..you gotta be kidding me here ;)

Free speech is one thing, but many forget that this most precious thing comes with responsiblity too.

People 'sometimes' are like cattle, they need help to avoid being lost, and offering up a ideology which is the reverse of what most law abiding, loving people adhere to for sanity and strength, simply isn't very logical or considerate of our species attempt at building a humanitarian civilization.

This is a non starter.


cheers
nl

[6r00k14n]

In a world where so many people strive for hope amidst turmoil, despair and hunger etc., what exactly is the incentive to put forth an agenda diametrically opposed to say, most every other religion on the planet,- all whom for the most part exhude a ideology that we are to love god, and love our neighbor as ourselves ( treat others with respect ) ?

This is what all other religions are supposed to be, in theory, but as pointed out in the Satanic Bible and observed by me, all of those religions, in practice, are self-serving institutions that use fear of god's wrath and the devil, promises of an afterlife, an conformist thinking to try to control behavior and stifle independent thought.

Satanists do not hate god. In fact, Satanists are cognitive of the fact that neither god nor Satan exist. Satan is the creation of the "worshippers or god", because for some strange reason loving god is not enough, apparently they need something to fear. As to why there is a church that uses Satan as its mascot, it is because the church is antithetical to all of the practices of other religions, but all of the other religions have two things in common, empty promises and a bad guy (Satan).

To end my religious rant, if you are truly offended by Ubuntu Satanic Edition and its community, why don't you do the Christian thing and FORGIVE US!

[cardinals_fan]

Ubuntu depends on Debian.
Under cardinals_fan's reasoning would this make Ubuntu NOT a Distro?
:lolflag:
Yes. As cardinals_fan has I think given the rank of distro to Ubuntu, logic needs to be revised.

(I don't think there is a single line of distro/non-distro)
No. Actually, under cardinals_fan's reasoning, Ubuntu is a distro because it has its own repo, but Kubuntu is not because it uses Ubuntu's repo and SE is not because its repo only has the themes, wallpaper, and music packages.

I think the logic is flawed at best, and at worst, I think he/she has drunk to much of the Kool-Aid, but at the very least, cardinals_fan is consistent, which I respect. If SE is not a distro on this basis, then neither is Kubuntu.
I like Koolaid... the blue flavor is best :)

Seriously, I stand by my arguments. While Ubuntu does depend on Debian for new packages, imported from Sid every release, if the whole Debian project were to magically disappear right now, Ubuntu would still function. Granted, it wouldn't provide new versions of packages, and the next version would be critically threatened, but the current Ubuntu version would still work properly. If Ubuntu were to vanish overnight, SE, Kubuntu, and all the other remasters using Ubuntu repos would no longer function properly.

[neighborlee]

This is what all other religions are supposed to be, in theory, but as pointed out in the Satanic Bible and observed by me, all of those religions, in practice, are self-serving institutions that use fear of god's wrath and the devil, promises of an afterlife, an conformist thinking to try to control behavior and stifle independent thought.

Satanists do not hate god. In fact, Satanists are cognitive of the fact that neither god nor Satan exist. Satan is the creation of the "worshippers or god", because for some strange reason loving god is not enough, apparently they need something to fear. As to why there is a church that uses Satan as its mascot, it is because the church is antithetical to all of the practices of other religions, but all of the other religions have two things in common, empty promises and a bad guy (Satan).

To end my religious rant, if you are truly offended by Ubuntu Satanic Edition and its community, why don't you do the Christian thing and FORGIVE US!

The verify definition of Satan can be found here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satan, and typically as is given to most cultures equates to the angel who was cast out of heaven. From that url:

" In the Book of Wisdom, the devil is represented as the being who brought death into the world.[3]

The 2nd Book of Enoch, also called the Slavonic Book of Enoch, contains references to a Watcher Grigori called Satanael.[4] It is a pseudepigraphic text of an uncertain date and unknown authorship. The text describes Satanael as being the prince of the Grigori who was cast out of heaven[5] and an evil spirit who knew the difference between what was "righteous" and "sinful".[6] A similar story is found in the book of 1 Enoch; however, in that book, the leader of the Grigori is called Semjâzâ. "

The rest of your rant/babble is divisive, so I wont respond.

There is nothing to forgive, your simply offering your opinion on this topic, but if you really feel the need to be forgiven you are free to pray about it. I do however find it absurd, that you claim its clear god does not exist yet offer no proof of it, whereas much evidence is clear, neither did mankind in its early infancy as early man have anything to do with creation itself, but that clearly something was behind the 'big bang' ( no one knows what was before that ), regardless of your effort to cast doubt on it ;)

Christians, and other people who worship God, do not fear God, and if they do they know nothing of God. If you knew anything about religion on this topic, you would obviously know that God is not referred to as that which is to fear. That is something that has come along only lately, but is not representative at least, of any of Jesus Christ's teachings ( or similar earthly prophets ). I was raised christian, and I certainly was not raised to fear God, yet a healthy respect, and love for whom we all owe our very existence ( unless you have proof to the contrary, if so I'd like to hear it ).

The empty promises you refer to are not the corrupt nature of religion itself, but the corrupt nature of 'some' of man that decided the wise teachings of the various prophets given to mankind , were somehow irrelevant and unnecessary to listen to. Maybe if those voices had been adhered to, slavery and many other fumblings of early man would have been avoided.

cheers
nl

[SirSigma]

You mean this is a real distro? :confused:

I remembered seeing some kind of "Satanic Ubuntu" group on Last.fm, but I thought that was some kind of inside joke or something. If this is real, then that's just crazy.

[Vivaldi Gloria]

I cannot help answering this:

I do however find it absurd, that you claim its clear god does not exist yet offer no proof of it,

Surprise surprise, science doesn't work that way. It's you who have to prove something - existence of the christian god. Anyone can come up with a "bright" story like "the universe was created by the flying spaghetti monster and ...". You know what, this version of the creation of the universe has as much evidence as the christian story - none. So the existence of the christian god is as likely as the existence of the flying spaghetti monster, which is very unlikely.

whereas much evidence is clear,

By "much" do you mean the following two non-evidence? There isn't even one evidence for the existence of the christian god. Not one!

neither did mankind in its early infancy as early man have anything to do with creation itself,

Yes, you see, it was the spaghetti monster who created things. I can't see how your sentence implies the existence of the (christian) god.

but that clearly something was behind the 'big bang'

Not clear to me. Please make it clear. Also make it clear why it wasn't the flying spaghetti monster which was "behind" the big bang.

( no one knows what was before that ),

You talk like as if you accept the big bang theory as a true theory. But that theory says that nothing existed (not even time) before big bang. Why don't you accept that part?

Besides, the nice thing with science is that we don't know everything. We are learning more everyday! But we don't give up like you when we cannot explain something and say "the flying spaghetti monster did it". Because that's unfounded and it has no evidence.

[parker13]

Come on now, I really thought we had come a very long ways from the days when people were burned at the stake , and when people wore sillly little white hats and paraded around fluffing their egotism and hate mongering..


I thought we had come a very long way from the days when we believed silly stories like divine creation. God ceased to exist on Thursday, 24 November 1859. Try to remember which century (nay, millennium) we're in.


People 'sometimes' are like cattle, they need help to avoid being lost, and offering up a ideology which is the reverse of what most law abiding, loving people adhere to for sanity and strength, simply isn't very logical or considerate of our species attempt at building a humanitarian civilization.


Maybe some people don't agree with the way your humanitarian civilization is going and are looking for an alternative. Law, love and logic are all points of view and maybe some people think that the reasoning behind these things should be based on something other than trying to please a bearded omnipotent entity.

[enlightenment now]

Parker13 I just watched your video of the Ubuntu Satanic Edition's Eternal Damnation Eternity Screensaver plugin and I have to say that this is Awesome!

Great Work!

http://parker1.co.uk/eternity/eternal-damnation.php

Ubuntu SE Glass 1 is lovely.

[cezdeville]

@neighborlee

don't want to offend you but basically your definition of Satan/Satanism is religion based. please accept that for many persons (including me) Satan (Lucipher/Phosphoros even more) is symbolic character which represents personal liberation (also from religion, but not only) and thus is equal to Prometheus or Ikaros.
thank you for your Bible quotation, i've read Holy Bible, i'm also heavy interested in religion, but tell me - have you ever read Satanic Bible? you would be surprised how much it has in common with Jesus teachings - especially in matters of loving oneself and respect for all other living beings including animals (yes!!) and also in terms of live adoration. Satanism is all about Humanism but just called differently. on the other hand it's often in great opposition to church teaching (not only Catholic) but this is why its called Satanism. you yourself have written that Satan (or fallen angel) is universal character for many religions/cultures. for me it's just universal symbol of opposition to religion tyranny.

we don't want you to change your mind, believes or whatever. it's your freedom and it's up to you, what you are going to do with it. but we - as living, feeling and thinking persons - demand to have right to believe in whatever we want (even if its flying spaghetti monster), as long as we do not force our believes into someone!

i'm sure that it has been written here many times: if you don't like SE, don't use it (i don't use it myself too). but, please let it be! i want to have freedom to choose it if i'd like to, and i want to have freedom to pick it up amongst other distros on DistroWatch!

ps. "allegory for knowledge or the enlightenment of mankind" - form the very Wiki definition you've linked to us in your post.

[geoken]

Not clear to me. Please make it clear. Also make it clear why it wasn't the flying spaghetti monster which was "behind" the big bang.



It was FSM. It's clearly obvious to most rational people that the big bang was initiated when the FSM detached one of his countless meatballs and infused it with the essence of his 14th noodly appendage, thus causing it to swell with his glory until finally exploding and spawning our universe.

[6r00k14n]

The rest of your rant/babble is divisive, so I wont respond.


I will take your condescending tone to be a thinly veiled acquiescense to my point of view.

[6r00k14n]

It was FSM. It's clearly obvious to most rational people that the big bang was initiated when the FSM detached one of his countless meatballs and infused it with the essence of his 14th noodly appendage, thus causing it to swell with his glory until finally exploding and spawning our universe.

Do you want to help me develop Ubuntu Flying Spaghetti Monster Edition?

[LaRoza]

This thread is going into religion and that is the topic for the OPP. This thread (was) is about Ubuntu SE getting banned from Distrowatch...