Subject: Re: Sad (was Re: comments on i386 -1.2BETA snapshot)
To: None <firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com>
From: Grey Wolf <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 08/29/1996 12:39:57
Peter Galbavy <email@example.com> writes:
# > Oh. So this is a confirmation of censorship of supposedly unmoderated
# > mailing lists ?
To which Charles Hannum <firstname.lastname@example.org> replies:
# I'm unclear on two things:
# 1) how this qualifies as `censorship', and
# 2) where you got the idea that our lists are `unmoderated'.
Well, it does look rather unfriendly when the explanation given is
pointing fingers at any given person, as in:
> You have frequently posted (or attempted to post) messages to NetBSD
> mailing lists that were, in addition to being far from on-topic,
> often quite abrasive and did not further the goals of the NetBSD project.
> As the group of people responsible for these mailing lists, the NetBSD
> Core Group decided that list owners should have the option of reviewing
> your messages before they are posted to the list. We regret only that
> this is necessary.
It could have been handled much better with a shorter message along the
> Your posting was relevant to the discussion as related to this mailing
> list. End of discussion.
Short and to the point, and it avoids opening old wounds, and it avoids
provoking petty bickering, something this list needs as badly as a disk
drive needs a dust bath.
# Our mailing lists are for the specific purpose of discussing and
# contributing to NetBSD. They are not for discussing Chorus, VSTa, the...
Other than that, this and the following several paragraphs compress to:
If you stay within the established charter, and are civil about it,
you will be heard. These rules apply to any group which employs
a reasonable charter. If you're in charge of the charter,
you're expected to uphold it, however awkward a situation that
And that all makes perfect sense.