> Thanks to everyone for the great comments.  I have a few questions, but
> I'm going to combine them into one message and work on the next draft

My suggestion here would be to pull a trick from the Linux camp's
standard bag of tricks and talk about "BSD" in the global sense,
e.g. lumping everyone's good points together for the purpose of
talking about BSD's overall feature set.  That is to say that if
FreeBSD has a rep for having lots of x86 bells and whistles as well as
reliability and industry acceptance then you say BSD has all of those
things.  If OpenBSD has a good rep for security then you can say that
BSD offers better security.  If NetBSD is known for wide
cross-platform support, then you say BSD... etc.

I'm sure you get the picture and, again, this is no less than what the
"Linux" camp has done in spades.  It might be Caldera/Red Hat with the
best installer, Debian with the most developers or TurboLinux with
"clustering", but talk to the press and what they're being fed is
"Linux has a great installer, offers clustering and has lots of
developers."  There is very little distinction between the actual
linux distributions themselves, and the fact that many of them are in
bitter competition with one another is conveniently ignored.  As far
as the press is concerned, Linux is a single phenomenon with a single
god at its head.

I'm also not saying we should just paper over our differences, but we
might do well to combine our individual "brand strengths" rather than
fall divided when it comes to position papers like this.

- Jordan