> Would you like NetBSD advocates to start joining the FreeBSD Alpha
> mailing list and noting how much more stable the original NetBSD Alpha 
> port is?

I don't think it would be any worse than the other slings and arrows
we've endured from misguided NetBSD advocates over the years - give it
your best shot, guys, we don't even particularly mind anymore.

I think the point here is that being hypersensitive about any
situation, be it FreeBSD/alpha or OpenBSD/anything, is not productive
and probably only damages the reputations of those going ballistic
more than anything else.  There was a remark made which implied that
FreeBSD didn't run on the alpha.  Two of us corrected that remark
(just as we probably would on USENET or any other public forum) and I
don't see any reason or rationale for the discussion to go any further
than that.  Remark made, correction(s) submitted, we can just let it
drop as far as I'm concerned.

As far as being sensitive is concerned, pardon me for my insensitivity
here but I think it's just silly at this stage.  We've all made our
beds and I see nothing to be gained by pretending that things are
other than they are or in going spare every time someone mentions
Niagra Falls.  There are 3 *BSDs for the Alpha.  None of them get any
of the press that Linux/alpha gets (re: Titanic).  Our problems
clearly lie elsewhere and arguing with the interior decorator over
your paint scheme while bulldozers are busily knocking down your house
strikes me as simply focusing on the wrong set of issues.

- Jordan