Jay R. Ashworth writes: > On Thu, Jul 10, 2003 at 10:58:56PM -0400, gabe f wrote: > > So then, why do you subscribe to the list, you could just read the > > emails on the website, > > thereby saving all of that internet traffic, by only viewing the email > > body text that appealed to you > > by its subject, and you wouldn't have to deal with those harmful > > vacation auto-replies, either? > > Cause I asked a question (which has drawn *no* replies, BTW -- mostly, > probably, cause I'd already asked the point guy on the topic and he didn't > know), and subscribing to follow the answers *is what you do*. I stayed on > a) waiting to see if someone picked up the questions and b) in case someone > asked one I could answer -- much the same reason I'm on the Linux Gazette > Answer Gang.
Yes, this 'point guy' was me. I tried to help you as good as I could, however communication was kind of tedious as you emails came back bouncing with : ----- Transcript of session follows ----- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>... Deferred: Connection timed out with firewall.jachomes.com. Message could not be delivered for 5 days Message will be deleted from queue I don't think you will find anyone else on this list who still has expertise about C&T chips. Furthermore I don't think you can complain that I have given you impolite answers. I have scheduled to look into the offset problem you are seeing. However there are more things in XFree86 I need to take care of so I was not able to do so immediately. > > > "the internet" has more than one field, by the way. I doubt you're in a > > personnel/user related area. > > Almost all of them in 20 years, except maybe BGP4. *Lots* of front line user > hand-holding and training, in fact -- including teaching people how to work > their mail user agents for best effect. So that poor configuration choices > on mailing lists won't bite *them*. :-) > > And between your attitude and David's, I must say, I can see why there was a > fuss with Keith, and why people suggested that he fork the project. If y'all > can't be bothered to be polite anymore, go find something else to do, 'k? > I don't see where David's answers been impolite - or anybody else. Linking this issue to the discussion about a fork is neither fair nor productive. My main intention starting this thread was to point out that many of those seeking support may never receive an answer. I had no intention to provoke a general political flamewar. We instead need a pragmatic solution for our problem - unless we want to keep making support for the garbage bin. Egbert. _______________________________________________ XFree86 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
