From owner-freebsd-chat Fri Oct 8 18: 8:48 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from smtp01.primenet.com (smtp01.primenet.com [206.165.6.131]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1BF115351 for ; Fri, 8 Oct 1999 18:08:38 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tlambert@usr09.primenet.com) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp01.primenet.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id SAA22818; Fri, 8 Oct 1999 18:08:33 -0700 (MST) Received: from usr09.primenet.com(206.165.6.209) via SMTP by smtp01.primenet.com, id smtpdAAAWia4rS; Fri Oct 8 18:08:13 1999 Received: (from tlambert@localhost) by usr09.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id SAA02228; Fri, 8 Oct 1999 18:07:57 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <199910090107.SAA02228@usr09.primenet.com> Subject: Re: Targeting the server: Not such a good idea? To: brett@lariat.org (Brett Glass) Date: Sat, 9 Oct 1999 01:07:57 +0000 (GMT) Cc: tlambert@primenet.com, chat@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.19991008153040.044486e0@localhost> from "Brett Glass" at Oct 8, 99 03:37:07 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > Maybe. However, the last time I mentioned something like this on > -advocacy, I was flamed for being "off topic!" So, I decided to > post to -chat, where no one could make that accusation. [ ... ] > >The invitation for comments looks like "and I'll whup the man what > >says it ain't so" -- I think the article itself is sufficient > >solicitation. > > I'm not looking to "whup the man who says it ain't so," but I would > like to hear if there are strong arguments on the other side. [ ... ] > >such that the > >message was not damned in some small minds by the messenger. > > Am I such a bad person to serve as the messenger? Yes, I have > said some controversial things here in the past, and that may > have rubbed a few people the wrong way. But I think that folks > will agree that I mean well, even if I have ideas that they > sometimes consider to be odd. There is a particular aspect to your style, evidenced by the "Comments?" invitation, that has a social tendency to be taken as you attempting to challenge the status quo. If you could merely provide the information, without editorializing it, I think that people would be more receptive. I also think you have a tendency to defend with zeal ideas which require a more politic and less knee-jerk defense, if they are to be accepted. If you could take a page from that URL you posted about the "Critique of Vulgar Raymondism", and in particular, the referenced link about Lysenkoism, you would probably be more effective in communicating on -advocacy. Now people might say "Terry is one to talk...", but I think my own position is more akin to that of Jamie Zawinski. 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-chat" in the body of the message