Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!munnari.OZ.AU!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!news.eng.convex.com!newshost.convex.com!newsgate.duke.edu!news.mathworks.com!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!senator-bedfellow.mit.edu!usenet From: ghudson@glacier.mit.edu (Greg Hudson) Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc Subject: Re: followup from censored port-i386@Netbsd.ORG Date: 03 Jul 1996 04:30:57 -0400 Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Lines: 46 Sender: ghudson@glacier.MIT.EDU Message-ID: <x7dpw6doi0t.fsf@glacier.MIT.EDU> References: <DERAADT.96Jun23070919@zeus.theos.com> <DERAADT.96Jun24082701@zeus.theos.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: glacier.mit.edu In-reply-to: deraadt@theos.com's message of 24 Jun 1996 14:27:01 GMT X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.1 [Once again, comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc elided from the newsgroups line at Jordan's request.] As usual, I'd like to clear up some possible misconceptions. Of course, you refer to "reading between the lines," which suggests that you think I (or someone else, since you don't mention my name) might be lying, but that's difficult to counter without a specific allegation. > Hmm, core isn't saying anything. But some random people are. Oh, > they talk with core every day, as friends. Oh, wait, maybe they are > speaking FOR CORE! Maybe the message they carry is simply core's > message? Perhaps, perhaps not. You decide. On one occasion I was asked by Jason to clear up the factual mess about which messages were dropped from port-i386 (and I stated that the information in question came from him). Other than that, no, I'm not speaking on core's behalf. It's just that none of them are interested in getting involved in a usenet flame war, and I am. > Did some of these people not `sign' a NetBSD document that says they > must BEHAVE? The document which I refused to sign because initially > you wanted _only_ me to sign it? The document talked about in > coremail? I haven't signed anything related to NetBSD, nor do I know of any "program whereby they control their developers' actions, including declaring what they may or may not say in private mail." And, having read coremail, I don't actually recall anyone asking you to sign a paper document, at least until it got to the point where you wanted everyone else to agree to the same things you did. > There are a few people who are a problem. They know who they are, > Charles, Chris, Herb, Jason, and yes, some of the people who have > posted in this thread. [...] > You simply don't go lambasting people working on other groups!! It > has absolutely NO useful purpose! I'm sure you think it's okay for you to say that right after directly referring to four people as a "problem" in a public forum, perhaps because they started it and you didn't, or because you're justified and they aren't, or something. But the person sending the flame always believes something of that nature.