From owner-freebsd-advocacy Tue Apr 27 6:35:43 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from fed-ef1.frb.gov (fed.frb.gov [132.200.32.32]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BA43153E9 for ; Tue, 27 Apr 1999 06:35:41 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from seth@freebie.dp.ny.frb.org) Received: by fed-ef1.frb.gov; id JAA03916; Tue, 27 Apr 1999 09:35:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from m1pmdf.frb.gov(192.168.3.38) by fed.frb.gov via smap (V4.2) id xman02999; Tue, 27 Apr 99 09:34:34 -0400 Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1999 09:34:10 -0400 (EDT) From: Seth Subject: Re: FreeBSD offerings by Gateway 2000 In-reply-to: <199904231824.LAA25659@usr02.primenet.com> To: Terry Lambert Cc: paul@originative.co.uk, dhagan@cs.vt.edu, freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG OK, I don't think we need to beat people up for a simple, innocent mistake that was made during an advocacy effort. This tends to discourage the person being criticized, and doesn't help the situation in any case. The fact of the matter is, someone took the time to try to help the cause in which we're all interested. Might I suggest that those of you who have experience and strong opinions about how advocacy efforts should be conducted (at least initially) put together some sort of FAQ or list of steps to take with DOs and DONTs? SB On Fri, 23 Apr 1999, Terry Lambert wrote: > > If people are going to send things like this to Gateway (or anyone else) > > please don't CC it to the advocacy group. It totally negates any positive > > advocacy you might achieve. > > In particular, there are two glaring problems: > > 1) Exposure of the list address makes it look insincere, > and instead a result of an organized campaign, even if, > as in this case, it wasn't. > > 2) Exposure of the intended recipient to follow-up replies > having to do with meta discussions or corrections and > contradictions by others who do not note the recipient > is included. Again, this makes it look insincere, but > worse, it weakens the message considerably, since not > only is it apparently an organized effort, it is also > apparently an amatuerish and poorly organized effort, > if the externally visable front they present is not > united. > > > Terry Lambert > terry@lambert.org > --- > Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present > or previous employers. > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message