Return to BSD News archive
#! rnews 1903 bsd Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!munnari.OZ.AU!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!feed1.news.erols.com!hunter.premier.net!news.mathworks.com!mvb.saic.com!pacifier!deraadt From: deraadt@theos.com (Theo de Raadt) Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc,news.groups Subject: Re: Why you should not vote NO for comp.unix.bsd.openbsd Date: 13 Feb 1997 10:02:08 GMT Organization: Theo Ports Kernels For Fun And Profit Lines: 25 Message-ID: <DERAADT.97Feb13030208@zeus.pacifier.com> References: <5dr60e$rk2@news.pacifier.com> <qum914tmgqa.fsf@cyclone.stanford.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: zeus.theos.com In-reply-to: Russ Allbery's message of 12 Feb 1997 21:12:45 -0800 Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc:5347 news.groups:8658 In article <qum914tmgqa.fsf@cyclone.stanford.edu> Russ Allbery <rra@cs.stanford.edu> writes: The only unfortunate thing about the entire situation is that no one noticed the newsgroups which should have obviously been included in the original RFD crossposting until later on in the process. These are the issues that caused the fuss: 1) David Lawrence specifically requested that the CFV postings be sent to the netbsd newsgroups, when the RFD postings had not. 2) The CFV (as written by a proponent) does not list the netbsd groups as areas where the articles are cross-posted 3) The proponents were not consulted or informed of these changes. And I guess that is also the reason for (2) above Those three irregularities are all anyone was really worried about. Nothing more. Not really very important issues compared to the larger issue of people voting `for the improvement of usenet' (cough, cough ;-) Really, I've nothing more to say about it. It's that simple. -- This space not left unintentionally unblank. deraadt@theos.com www.OpenBSD.org -- We're fixing security problems so you can sleep at night.