View Full Version : SlimServer is not everything to everyone

2005-08-01, 16:00
On Mon, 2005-08-01 at 13:40 -0700, gdg wrote:
> I'm trying to find a way of fulfilling a basic requirement that I have
> as a user. Is that OK with you?

You say you are not "a hacker"
You clearly do not understand what open source software is, or how
it is supported. It is supported by nice people because they want to.

If the SlimDevices product doesn't do what you need, buy
something else. They have a 30 day happyness guarantee.
Use it. Be happy.

Your tone is unacceptable to me. I would prefer that you not
post to the support forums, because I get them in my email
inbox. I chose to do that because sometimes I help
people enjoy their SqueezeBox.

No one is getting rich here. There is no giant
marketing department that does consumer surveys
to find out how to respond to "user requirements"

You wrote:
>I'm not a hacker and have no software skills.

The software is getting better because nice people
want to. If it doesn't meet your needs, please
go elsewhere. You also should work on your
diplomatic skills.


2005-08-02, 04:56
What's this in reply to? On the web forums it appears as a post on its own.


Mike Hanson
2005-08-02, 05:55
What's this in reply to?
Pat doesn't appear to appreciate thread drift, and/or he feels that a particular side issue deserves a thread of its own. Consequently, he occasionally starts new threads with a quote from an old one. It's minorly disconcerting, but not worth getting upset about, in and of itself. :)

-=> Mike Hanson <=-

2005-08-02, 10:40
On Tue, 2005-08-02 at 05:55 -0700, Mike Hanson wrote:
> max.spicer Wrote:
> > What's this in reply to?

It is a new subject for
RE: [slim] Re: The SB2 appears to have some serious flaws!

> Pat doesn't appear to appreciate thread drift, and/or he feels that a
> particular side issue deserves a thread of its own.

Not being a forum user, I see it at little differently.
I don't see any "serious flaws" as discussed in the thread.
I see someone not liking what the functionality is.
and not understanding what OpenSource community development
is about.

I thought this was a more realistic, and less inflammatory
equivalent. On usenet is it is easy to gently nudge the subject
to better reflect the spirit of the thread. Of course,
usenet is nearly dead. Many of the tools developed
over decades of usenet experience are not yet part of
the wonderful world of forums, like thread-specific and
user-specific kill files.

If it will help, I'll include the original subject thread as
part of the quote to help make the context more
obvious. It was clear to me. :-)