From owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jun 23 13:15:23 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: advocacy@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0494516A41C for ; Thu, 23 Jun 2005 13:15:23 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from listsub@401.cx) Received: from rambo.401.cx (rambo.401.cx [80.65.205.166]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82E8543D1D for ; Thu, 23 Jun 2005 13:15:22 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from listsub@401.cx) Received: from [10.3.101.26] (132.dairy.twenty4help.se [80.65.195.132]) by rambo.401.cx (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j5NDF43v039159; Thu, 23 Jun 2005 15:15:05 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from listsub@401.cx) Message-ID: <42BAB5D0.6050607@401.cx> Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 15:14:56 +0200 From: "Roger 'Rocky' Vetterberg" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Julian H. Stacey" References: <200506221914.j5MJEnHf039939@fire.jhs.private> In-Reply-To: <200506221914.j5MJEnHf039939@fire.jhs.private> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Use send-pr. Use chat@. X-BeenThere: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD Evangelism List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 13:15:23 -0000 Julian H. Stacey wrote: >>I feel the handbook could be made clearer in some areas, but I >>believe it is good in general. > > > ( This Not directed at sender above, so sender's name omitted, but the above > is a mild example of much worse noise from other hollow vessels on this list. > If it doesn't help practical advocacy, a posting belongs to > freebsd-chat@freebsd.org , not advocacy@ , please more subscribe chat@ ) Julian, since you go out on a rampage everytime anyone posts something on advocacy@, I just have to ask; what, in your opinion, would be ok to discuss on this mailinglist? Clearly, improving the website or writing new documentation does not qualify in your eyes, so Im kind of curious on exactly how you define advocacy? FreeBSD.org describes advocacy@ as: "Furthering the Use of FreeBSD Share ideas and plan to increase the number of companies and individuals using FreeBSD". The original poster had an idea that he thought could increase the number of FreeBSD users, as well as allowing it to target new usergroups. If that does not fit the description, I dont know what does. -- R