I'm trying to get away from acting like I'm fending off a pack of wolves; please accept my apologies for any unnecessary rudeness or hostility. Thank you for your patience. :)
If you could me a favor, please read *carefully* before you respond :) Since a lot was said, two things I want to reiterate: In response to Chris's suggestion: Chris Ross <cross+open...@distal.com> wrote: > If you want to suggest that OpenBSD have a way to categorize certain > software packages as optional due to sensitivities or perceptions of > “appropriate”, then feel free to ask for that. I want to set expectations accurately; most likely useful for parents setting up a system for minors. I answered a question from Philip Guenther. I'll wait for some elaboration on why it was asked. On Sun, Sep 14, 2025 at 12:56 AM Samuel B <puser0...@gmail.com> wrote: > If you read nothing else, read this: > -------------------------- > To reiterate: > > Setting expectations is what's important here. For more dependent > > users (I'm thinking kids) those people setting things up should have > > some idea what they're dealing with. Does that make sense? > -------------------------- > > Philip Guenther <guent...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Is your concern that someone playing the 'battlestar' game can trigger > > the above situation, perhaps under coercion of game mechanics? > Yes, I care about practical ramifications, not the mere presence. Much > of the game's code reads like a deranged fantasy. Like I said, "fairly > typical sample." Why are you asking? > > jslee <openbsd.li...@internetemails.net> wrote: > >> On Sun, 14 Sep 2025, at 12:23, Samuel B wrote: > >> Mind, YOUR opinion isn't of much interest to me > > > > Why then do you expect others to be interested in *your* opinion? > > Seems pretty unreasonable > Take it in context; Top line of the first email: > > I want to know what the developers think. > The mail you did read was responding to a rather dismissive attempt to > read my mind. If the respondent wants to make room for a cordial > disscussion, I'm fine with that; but my PRIMARY focus was eliciting a > response from those who actually call the shots. If you read the rest of > the thread, you know that Chris Ross made some fair suggestions, which I > gladly noted. I am genuinely interested in the TOPIC of the discussion, > please don't make it about ME. > > Greg, What were you hoping to accomplish by that remark? I _presume_ > you can handle it far better than some kids who will explore whatever is > handed to them. > The major reason for dealing with this publicly is that I tried this > before, using more oblique references, either noone believed me, or they > were all for the things I was speaking against. Better, IMO, that > OpenBSD be known for its pitfalls, than have evil suprises where they do > the most damage. >
