Ted
I hope you noticed that Phil Smith was enjoying this discussion initially:
<quote>
This is fun, and enlightening.
</quote>
There's nothing more mainframe than z/OS and there's nothing that excites a
z/OS system programmer more that a Program Directory. It's in a Program
Directory recently referenced in another thread that I discovered the
official abbreviation for UNIX System Services - in the correct style: first
the words in full and then the abbreviation in brackets - in other words,
unmistakable:
<quote>
Defined to use z/OS UNIX System Services (z/OS UNIX) or OS/390 UNIX System
Services (OS/390 UNIX)
</quote>
Thus we have what IBM anyhow "wants to call it".
See my post to Rick Fochtman for details.
It's somewhat difficult to know where possible ambiguities in the discussion
of z/OS topics could better be discussed than in IBM-MAIN but I'm always
open to - reasonable - suggestions.
I was not aware I was making any "ad hominem" attacks. Since this phrase
refers to not concentrating on the substance of the argument, I can say that
I have often been trying to persuade others to avoid this error.
Since you do not supply a reference, as is conventional, I am not helped in
knowing what you considered to be an "ad hominem" attack. Would such an
observation be an example of your version of an "ad hominem" attack?
And since the discussion has now turned to the personal ("ad hominem") and
there has been much emphasis on context - in other contemporaneous posts -
perhaps I can point out that *context* also involves the *personal*. It was
mentioned in a post when this issue was last aired that the reaction of at
least one person - and I'm another - on seeing "USS" is the following - very
much slowed down:
"Oh, USS, I know about that."
"What the **** has this got to do with text messages between a human end
user at a secondary LU communicating with the VTAM SSCP trying to log on,
log off or get in-session information for the help desk[1]?"
"Oh, it's another of those posts involving UNIX System Services."
(sotto voce) "I do wish they'd say z/OS UNIX (or OS/390 UNIX if
back-level)."
-
And we have another one who is unprepared to defend his comments!
Chris Mason
[1] A facility unfortunately denied to TN3270E clients because the authors
of RFC 1647 seem to have been ignorant of this capability of USS exchanges.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ted MacNEIL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main
To: <IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU>
Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2007 8:10 PM
Subject: Re: The USS Heresy (was Patents, Copyrights, Profits, Flex and
Hercules)
>I guess it's not so much fun anymore!
Please! PLEASE! Take this elsewhere!
The above statement is correct!
It's not fun, anymore!
This is about mainframes, NOT religious wars on abbreviations!
Maybe this is why IBM is attempting another forum?
Ad hominem attacks do not belong here (or on any listserv).
The signal to noise ratio has gotten so low that I am thinking of
filtering USS out of my e-mail.
I've been seeing a lot of z/OS questions being asked on more specialised
lists, lately.
I wonder why?
PS: I know I haven't been perfect, but at least I try.
(The last post I shall ever make about USS/UNIX Systems Services/zUNIX, or
whatever you want to call it!)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
