From: greg@halcyon.com (greg naber) Subject: Re: The Zen of Linux, part 2 Date: 8 Jun 1993 23:44:50 -0700
>(Please keep this discussion _out_ of comp.os.linux.
> Followups to news.groups.)
This conversation originally started in news.groups, *I* am not the
one who moved it back to comp.os.linux, but as you keep putting it back into
comp.os.linux, I feel I have to reply to your innuendos here. I am also
wondering why I am playing your silly game.
>>> the vote taker about it, he particularly didn't care for the idea.
>I looked and I didn't find it - I think you must be mistaken. I saved
>all the email I received regarding the vote and almost all the news
>postings, and I grepped the lot for your name.
I too have it backed up on disk somewhere's, but it isn't worth
my time to attempt to find it.
>>> When I
>>> posted a message with instructions to fidonet, on how to vote, the vote
>>> taker complained to David Lawrence about it.
>I have found the messages in question. Greg Naber's posting was more
>than just instructions on how to vote and was not well thought of by
>David Lawrence. IMO I behaved with total propriety.
>I am awaiting a reply to my email to Greg Naber and David Lawrence
>requesting their permission to post the exchange.
I already said to post it, but please post it in it's entirity, if you feel
you must post it again. I really don't want to have to dig out a copy of a
post from you. I have better things to do with my time.
> Oh good, we get an impartial vote taker again.
>I allowed and will allow anyone who can get mail messages to me to
>vote. If they are unable to do so that's their problem. (Your sentence
>is rather circular, don't you think?)
There were a number of messages that were sent to you, that didn't show up
in the list of votes received, are you saying they never made it?
or are you saying the software never processed them?
>> you were afraid that I was able to post counterfeit votes,
>Is that not a legitimate concern ? As I say, though, I don't recall
>the exchange, and I didn't find it in my trawl through my archives
>last night. Could you dig it out and post it, please ?
Sorry, I don't have that archive here, you said that to someone else, which
is of course, why you asked me to post it.
>Why didn't you just mail me ? That wouldn't have been a `ruckus'. If
>you had mailed me within the voting period the problem (if it was my
>fault - I still don't see what happened) would have been fixed !
I did, never answered me, in fact, you did a wonderful job of ignoring this
low-life fidonet dog.
>I am not responsible for the mistakes of people whose knowledge of the
>way Usenet works is lacking to such an extent that they wouldn't
I see that you really couldn't care less about whether fidonet can vote or
not, this is a real good position to take and proves once again, what I have
been saying. Thanks