[OT] Re: Server down?

[Nuno Monteiro <nuno@itsari.org>]

On 24.01.03 15:18 John Bradford wrote:

[more snippage]
>> 
>> 
>> That is all fine and dandy, but you do realize that Dave is one of the
>> postmasters (along with Matti Aarnio), dont you?
> 
> Yes.
> 
>> I believe he is a little more qualified than you to tell users what
>> to do.
> 
> About 50% of the traffic on this mailing list is *way* off-topic, and
> nothing is done about it.
> 


Yes, and...? What has that got to do with anything? Guess what, you just 
contributed to that yourself -- the original point was about someone 
being unsubscribed. Why was the amount of offtopic emails brought into 
the equation?

But, while we're on that, what do you propose to do then? Go up to the 
house of everyone who posted offtopic here and restrain them so they wont 
post anymore? Well, let me introduce you to two simple concepts. One, 
freedom of speech. Two, freedom to ignore the freedom of speech. If you 
dont like what you read, /dev/null it. C'mon, lighten up. Life's much too 
important to be taken seriously ;) But dont expect to realistically 
enforce 'ontopicness' (if that is a word, anyway) on a list this large. 
It just doesnt work, period. There are too many RMS' around who have the 
listening ability of a brick wall for that to ever work. You should, 
however, be very thankful to Dave and Matti for managing the list so you 
can sit confortably and scream bloody murder from rooftops. You just have 
no idea of how much work goes behind the scenes, and what lengths they go 
so your daily fix of LKML reaches your mailbox, do you?

Anyhow, I dont think the signal to noise ratio has shifted significantly, 
for the most part. There are the occasional spikes now and again, and 
specifically as of late with all the raving and ranting about GNU/ and 
akin sillyness, but overall, I dont really think its any better or any 
worse than it has ever been. Maybe I'm just wrong, though.

For my part, anyway, thanks David, thanks Matti. You do a superb job and 
I (and certainlly thousands others) appreciate it very  much.


> I post a perfectly on-topic, sensible suggestion, and I am rudely
> flamed for it.
> 

You werent flamed, or your definitions of "being flamed" and "rudely" are 
very different than mine. David just stepped up to his role of postmaster 
and pointed out that what you suggested was actually wrong, and 
procceeded to explain what a user should do, should he ever get bounced 
off the list. Dont see where the flames come into the equation, frankly. 
Then again, you only thought it was sensible. As Dave pointed out, it 
wasnt so sensible afterall. So I see why you thought you were being 
flamed. No one likes to be proven wrong before an audience of tens of 
thousands.


>> Who's looking stupid and shouting now?
> 
> Err, not me.

Thats where we disagree. From this end, and all vectors considered, it 
certainly looks like you.

Please dont think I'm pouring petrol into the (already fiercely) burning 
fire. I have no intention or desire whatsoever to start yet another 
pointless-flame-fest-du-jour. Lets just agree that we disagree and leave 
it be, pretty please? :)

Regards,


	Nuno