From owner-freebsd-chat Wed May 5 15: 3:36 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from lariat.lariat.org (lariat.lariat.org [206.100.185.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23E8C1551A for ; Wed, 5 May 1999 15:03:33 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from brett@lariat.org) Received: from mustang.lariat.org (IDENT:ppp0.lariat.org@lariat.lariat.org [206.100.185.2]) by lariat.lariat.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA26583; Wed, 5 May 1999 16:03:23 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <4.2.0.37.19990505155002.04424e90@localhost> X-Sender: brett@localhost X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.37 (Beta) Date: Wed, 05 May 1999 15:52:43 -0600 To: junkmale@xtra.co.nz, chat@FreeBSD.ORG From: Brett Glass Subject: Re: PCWeek article by Anne Chen -- Comments In-Reply-To: <19990505213955.KWWB7202931.mta1-rme@wocker> References: <4.2.0.37.19990505143833.04511280@localhost> <199905051822.NAA12099@free.pcs> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org At 09:37 AM 5/6/99 +1200, Dan Langille wrote: >From what I've read, it is not only the "NOMINAL leadership" which opposes >your tactics. It appears to be much wider than the leadership. Not based on my e-mail. It seems mainly to be a few of the leaders and then some flamers. I get a great deal of support via private e-mail from people who don't want to get flamed. Look what happened to Mike Avery. One posting -- and WHAM. And it was a good posting, too. >As for "effective tactics", it is the definitiion of effective which >appears to be in dispute. Specifically the tactics you propose (and which >presumably you assume to be effective) are not deemed to be effective by >large numbers of people. The difference is that I have proof. The increasing popularity of Linux and the demise of OS/2 are clear demonstrations of what works and what does not. --Brett To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message