Re: [SLUG] How to post to lists

From: Smitty (a.smitty@verizon.net)
Date: Fri Jan 10 2003 - 21:50:48 EST


On Friday 10 January 2003 19:33, you wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 05:33:02PM -0500, David R. Meyer wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> > Please keep it up, all five of you, because every time you get on here
> > and flame me, more people are driven away from SLUG and somehow they
> > find the new LUG, where you'll not find this kind of crap.
>
> I've cautioned you privately about this; now I will do so publicly. If
> you want to start another LUG in our midst, that's fine. I told you I'd
> let you promote it in a limited way on our list, which I have done.
> However, I won't have you saying, effectively, "It's _bad_ in SLUG; come
> over to FLALUG, where it's _not_ bad." Not on this list.
>
> When you started the "Windows password cracker" thread, the result was
> entirely predictable. I just shut up when someone does this, because I
> know the list will slam whoever asks the question. This isn't the first
> time someone's asked a (seeming) Windows question on the list, and the
> result is almost always the same. It doesn't matter that you wanted a
> Linux program to do this; you didn't make that clear in the original
> post. And right at this point, many list members have raw nerves (myself
> included) because of the friction you and Smitty have caused in the last
> week. So the reaction is probably exaggerated.

Paul, there never would have been "friction" if you would have honestly and
consistently applied your own rules, be any of them captious or not. Instead
you exempted yourself from them. I think it is interesting that you have not
been given any warnings for your infractions here. You seem to be saying
that Dave and I are "in bad" to this list. So, you don't want Dave knocking
SLUG on the list, fine, I agree, but on the other hand, you have no trouble
with knocking Dave and I. You have a double standard here, Paul, and in my
own defense, I want this known.

>
> It doesn't really matter whether you _intend_ to cause trouble here; the
> fact is that you do, and the effect is the same whether you intend to or
> not. You're welcome to do as you like in your group and on your list.
> But as you have been keen to point out, _this_ list has rules. Running
> down SLUG and creating static violates the _spirit_ of them, at the very
> least.

This thread is a continuation of the earlier hostile ones. I say it is time
all parties stop adding to the situation and the thread REALLY ends here.
Smitty

>
> Paul M. Foster
> President
> Suncoast Linux Users Group (SLUG)



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 13:16:45 EDT