On Wed, May 10, 2006 at 10:03:04AM -0500, Greg Barniskis wrote:
No one is belittling the subject, only pointing out that it's both
OT and done with. The appearance of the logo on the Web site is not
a beginning, it's a finality.
questions@ is for general user questions. The sex-toy just appeared
on the main website, and a user then asked questions about it. That's
a perfectly valid forum, *especially* considering the current time frame.
Point taken. I could have phrased that better.
* What/when/how did this happen?
* How and when can it be undone?
* Why didn't I hear about this before?
These are indeed all perfectly valid questions. What I was trying to
express is that the askers really don't seem to be accepting (or
even seeing) the perfectly valid answers:
* See the archives where this was beaten to death multiple times.
* The best place to pursue such matters is in those forums chartered
for PR and general chatter.
* Read [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To those taking affront at such answers, no one is saying "oh, fork
you!" in some intentionally rude or belittling way (at least, I'm
not), they're saying forking (process-wise) to the appropriate forum
is the logical thing to do.
And [in response to the opposition party] no, I don't buy the
assertion that questions@ is the correct forum to continue fighting
in simply because it's popular. That's like saying spam is good
because it reaches a lot of people cheaply. Forums have charters for
Greg Barniskis, Computer Systems Integrator
South Central Library System (SCLS)
Library Interchange Network (LINK)
<gregb at scls.lib.wi.us>, (608) 266-6348
firstname.lastname@example.org mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"