Keeping debate in its place so we can actually reach resolution [Was: Re: ]
On Fri, 20 May 2005, Michael K. Edwards wrote:
> On 5/19/05, Thomas Bushnell BSG <tb@becket.net> wrote:
> > You are choosing to post on three different forums. Having made
> > that choice, it is your obligation to make your comments relevant
> > to them all; you cannot post on debian-devel, and then insist that
> > your interlocutors there read a different list.
>
> Oh, nuts. I didn't realize this thread was still copied to hell and
> gone. I'll try to summarize briefly, and would the next person
> please cut d-d and waste-public off if appropriate?
Can we please try to hold most of these discussions primarily in
-legal?
Once we have actually figured out what the primary issue is, and
understood the ramifications of it, only then should we present a
cogent, clear analysis of what the actual issue is to upstream, so
that they can actually deal with it appropriately.
Otherwise, all we're doing is burying upstream (and frankly, -devel)
under a deluge of material that they could care less about, and
hurting our chances of eventually resolving the issue (whatever it is)
appropriately.
[Finally, as a major nitpick: Please, please, please, Set a useful
Topic:. Otherwise it becomes quite impossible to return to these
threads at any point in the future. Topicless threads are almost as
bad as threads with a wrong topic.]
Don Armstrong
--
"For those who understand, no explanation is necessary.
For those who do not, none is possible."
http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu
Reply to: