On Mon, Aug 16, 1999 at 11:25:22PM +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote: > > * Please direct replies to -boot, please keep me Cc'd as I am not > > * subscribed to that list, thankyou. > > * > > * ObDevelAnnounce: I want this to reach all developers so they are at > > * least aware of the criticisms raised. Discussion from this point on > > * should happen in -boot, not -devel-announce for obvious reasons. > > This is a general debian-devel or debian-boot issue -- why is it on > debian-devel-announce? I'm even more surprised that you would set followups > to debian-boot to which you are not even subscribed. > > Perhaps we could have -devel-announce moderated. Any comment from our > listmasters? I should have sent the message to -boot and then commented about it on -devel-announce. I decided not to add more noise to the lists by commenting about it there once someone made it apparent to me that I should have. On the other hand, you decided that you should add more noise to the lists by posting a pointless "why was this off topic message posted here?" message. This message should have been sent to me and me alone if anywhere. The same goes for anyone else who has a problem with anything I post. No promises I'll read it and even less promises I'll reply and beg your forgiveness, still.. To the complaint of off-topic posting to the list, I can only say: Pot, kettle, black. As for not being subscribed to -boot, I'm likely to soon not be subscribed to -devel most likely because of senseless noise and the difficulty of sifting through it for something worth reading and additional time constraints that will likely make doing so a waste of valuable study time. Does that mean the day I unsubscribe from -devel I may no longer post a message there? If you read it, the Reply-to was set to both that list and myself. If that's not enough, too bad. My apologies for misdirecting the original message and for further adding to the noise ratio with this one, especially given that most likely the people who should be reading this message (there are a few of them at least) probably won't. As to those this reply pisses off, right now I'm far too tired to care. I might care tomorrow after I actually have had a couple of hours' sleep, but somehow I doubt it. -- Joseph Carter <knghtbrd@debian.org> Debian GNU/Linux developer GnuPG: 2048g/3F9C2A43 - 20F6 2261 F185 7A3E 79FC 44F9 8FF7 D7A3 DCF9 DAB3 PGP 2.6: 2048R/50BDA0ED - E8 D6 84 81 E3 A8 BB 77 8E E2 29 96 C9 44 5F BE -------------------------------------------------------------------------- * Culus fears perl - the language with optional errors
Attachment:
pgpTEBTLUGMn3.pgp
Description: PGP signature