mike ledoux wrote:
> >>I explained what I was looking to do, and why. Their response? The
> >>equivalent of "Screw you - we disapprove so figure it out yourself".
> >>
> >>My point? (Yeah, I do have one here somewhere) By just making
> >>judgements rather than helping and offering suggestions to alternatives,
> >>we run the same risk - distancing ourselves and alienating folks,
> >>thereby driving them to other camps.
> >Yeah, it's a good point, and one well taken :)
>
> OTOH, one of the stated advantages of Linux over WinNT is security.
> If we tell people how to unsecure the system without adequately
> explaining the consequences, we'll lose that advantage.
I hope that nobody thinks I'm implying that the security issue should
not have been brought up. I wholeheartedly agree with the rationale
behind the responses I saw here. Taking that security measure out is
(at least, in most cases I can think of) the "Wrong Thing To Do" (tm?).
My point (as poorly formed as it perhaps was) was only that it should
not preclude us from offering the information.
After all, security through obscurity has never seemed a good idea to
me. ;)
--
"EE - can't spell geek without it...
CS - can't spell ecstasy without it..." -Rob Holak
Cole Tuininga
Network Admin
Code Energy, Inc
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(603) 766-2208
**********************************************************
To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following text in the
*body* (*not* the subject line) of the letter:
unsubscribe gnhlug
**********************************************************
