PDA

View Full Version : RFC: slimdevices.com mailing list configuration



Tim Long
2003-12-06, 11:15
What kind of logic is that? You think putting the list behind a web
server magically makes a difference?

--Tim

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jason [mailto:jason (AT) pagefamily (DOT) net]
> Sent: Saturday 6 December 2003 07:15
> To: 'SlimDevices Discussion'
> Subject: [slim] RFC: slimdevices.com mailing list
> configuration
>
> Bologna flame wars and ego strutting like this are exactly
> why this list should be retired and replaced with a web based
> forum with MODERATION.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: discuss-bounces (AT) lists (DOT) slimdevices.com
> [mailto:discuss-bounces (AT) lists (DOT) slimdevices.com] On Behalf Of
> Mark C. Langston
> Sent: Friday, December 05, 2003 11:57 PM
> To: SlimDevices Discussion
> Subject: [slim] RFC: slimdevices.com mailing list
> configuration
>
> On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 10:45:19PM -0500, Rob Funk wrote:
> >
> > This is not a techie list. On a techie list this is a reasonable
> > expectation. On a non-techie list it is not.
> >
>
> Following standards and conventions is only appropriate on
> techie lists?
> violating them is perfectly acceptable on non-techie lists?
>
> I see. So you're perfectly fine with bottom-quoting,
> "quoted-printable", large attachments, and similar crap being
> sent to the list too, I suppose. After all, we should only
> follow standards and conventions on "techie" lists.
>
> And a word on that: This list is for a product that, last
> time I checked, assumes you know how to add a new networked
> device to an RFC1918-compliant home network and install perl
> correctly, at a minimum.
> It's also for a product that's by-and-large marketed to the
> Linux crowd (see repeated /. coverage) because it's OSS and
> Perl-based.
>
> That's far from the "non-techie" crowd.
>
> >
> > I suspect you will deliberately try to mess with the list
> to provoke
> > such
> a
> > change.
> >
>
>
> No, I won't. But I suspect you'll happily shoot and
> otherwise vilify the messenger when those things do come to
> pass. I said they were inevitable simply because they've
> occurred on every mailing list with which I'm familiar of any
> substance and size that had ever had Reply-To:
> munged. And I'm familiar with quite a few lists.
>
> >
> > Is that a threat?
> >
>
> No; again, it's simply a statement of fact. That you
> interpret it as a threat is telling, however. Perhaps you're
> just a tad over-defensive?
>
> I'm not an unreasonable person. I am, however, a person of principle.
> Sean knows this. Dean knows this. The rest of the original
> contributors know this, I believe. I don't know if it's
> still in the current version of the server, but if it is, you
> might want to check the developer's name easter egg sometime.
> I'm happy to contribute. I'm just as happy to leav ewhen
> things get irrational, as they seem to be becoming.
>
>
> >
> > You're banging your head against the existing standards on
> this list,
>
> Dean asked that this issue be hashed out publicly.
>
> >
> > A system configuration setting is not a law of physics.
> >
>
> It is until it's changed or subverted. And we weren't
> discussing the setting qua setting; we were discussing the
> setting as an embodiment of or variance from a net-wide
> standard and historical convention.
>
> > The current system is working just fine.
>
>
> ...for now, which was my point. Perhaps you missed it?
>
>
>
> > It's about playing to the audience.
> >
>
> Yes, you do seem to want to do that, don't you? How about
> engaging in debate rather than rhetoric?
>
> >
> > In that case, I hope you're banned from the list for
> causing problems
> > out of a desire to see your dire predictions vindicated.
> >
>
>
> If Sean asks me to leave, I'll leave.
>
> --
> Mark C. Langston Sr. Unix SysAdmin
> mark (AT) bitshift (DOT) org mark (AT) seti (DOT) org
> Systems & Network Admin SETI Institute
> http://bitshift.org http://www.seti.org
>