Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.os.386bsd.misc:5368 comp.unix.bsd:16159 Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!newshost.marcam.com!news.mathworks.com!news2.near.net!public.x.org!kaleb From: kaleb@x.org (Kaleb KEITHLEY) Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd Subject: Re: Put the Cannons Away: Vote YES on newsgroup reformation. Date: 13 Feb 95 20:33:43 GMT Organization: X Consortium Inc. Lines: 86 Message-ID: <kaleb.792707623@exalt> References: <D3o5Ew.8x2@nbn.com> <3hdu9u$rhm@park.uvsc.edu> <3hegvm$plp@agate.berkeley.edu> <hm.792410152@hcswork.hcs.de> <3hhlk1$fc9@agate.berkeley.edu> <3hjmsn$p7b@park.uvsc.edu> <kaleb.792586335@fedora.x.org> <3ho9kj$p9@park.uvsc.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: exalt.x.org X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.0 #5 Terry Lambert <terry@cs.weber.edu> writes: >kaleb@fedora.x.org (Kaleb KEITHLEY) wrote: >] >In the spirit of "do something broken now and fix it later", the >] >simplest change is renaming "386bsd" to "bsd". >] >] You continue to disregard the simple fact that the Usenet cabal won't >] allow this. They simply will not allow comp.unix.bsd and comp.os.bsd >] to exist at the same time. Period. Call them stupid -- many have -- but >] I tried at the outset to get that and they declined to post the RFD >] until I did things their way. >And you continue to call it RFD (Request For "Discussion") and CFV >(Call For "Votes") in light of this? >Why even observe the trappings of democracy your "Cabal" supposedly >subverts? Yeah it's a farce, so what? Is there a constructive suggestion buried in code somewhere in your post or is this just more rhetoric? I could certainly post the newgroups myself and start a round of newgroup/rmgroup wars. I'm willing to work to dismantle the cabal, but I want to know who's going to replace David Lawrence. It's kinda like tolerating Sadam Hussein in Iraq because we know if he got taken out that whoever replaced him would be even worse. It's been said before, and it merits saying again that David Lawrence is the proverbial 1,000 pound gorilla who sits anywhere he wants, because he knows that no one else is willing to do the job he's doing. >] >Yes, it's a stupid idea. Doing something broken thinking you can >] >fix it later (much like the 'comp.unix' heirarchy itself) always >] >*is* a stupid idea. >] >] Not necessarily. Sometimes it's better to do something, even if there >] are things wrong with it, than nothing, and I think this is one of those >] times. >"Never substitute activity for action" -- Seneca "Don't just do something, stand there." -- Kaleb Sure, activity without a purpose is a waste. Activity with a purpose is action. You can spend your whole life trying to figure out if something is the right thing to do before you do it. That's my idea of a waste. Sometimes you do something and find out after the fact that it was the completely wrong thing to do; but if you choose to do nothing for fear it will be the wrong thing, then you don't even get to learn from your mistake. Better to do something, even if it turns out to be wrong, than nothing. And if it turns out to have been the right thing, then you're ahead of the game. Don't settle for nothing. The goal was to get groups in Usenet for FreeBSD. NetBSD, 386BSD, and BSD/OS got a free ride. All this mudslinging and name calling has just about sucked every last drop of philanthropy right out of me. I'm eager for this farce to be over and will count the days until the topic can be reopened. Then all the know-it-alls who think their powers of persuasion as so good can have their turn to grovel at the cabal's feet trying to get the RFD posted. And I'll probably get a good laugh when the RFD finally gets posted. I use FreeBSD. I think it needs to be marketed better. It's a good tool. It shouldn't be that hard to find a newsgroup with an appropriate name. If it is, then there's something wrong. Do you think that all the fools who use Micro$oft Windoze have any trouble finding groups to ask questions in? The current situation of no group with FreeBSD in the name is nothing short of intolerable. If we accept your premise, we should let this intolerable state of affairs continue until some unspecified day in the future. Lots of people keep trying to turn this into a debate about whether FreeBSD, NetBSD, BSD/OS, and 386BSD have a legal right to call themselves UNIX. That's not what this is about at all. It's about getting groups in Usenet for them. So get past whether they're really UNIX or not. Get past the fact that the only opening in the Usenet name space has the word UNIX in it. It also has BSD in it, and these operating systems, UNIX or not, are undeniably derived from BSD. If that's not true, then ask yourself why do their names even have BSD in them. If you want a newsgroup with the name FreeBSD, NetBSD, BSD/OS, or 386BSD in it, then vote yes on the CFV. If you want newbies to be able to find that newsgroup, to be able to ask questions and get or give answers, then vote yes. Don't *settle* for nothing. -- Kaleb KEITHLEY