On Thu, 2002-08-22 at 16:40, Andrew Bennetts wrote: > On Thu, Aug 22, 2002 at 04:33:23PM +1000, DaZZa wrote: > > On Thu, 22 Aug 2002, Jeff Waugh wrote: > > > > > "Microsoft backlash boosts Linux." > > > > So the title makes the article content? > > For many people, it effectively does -- people will often choose to read > or not read the rest of an article based on a title. > > Perhaps a brief note pointing out that this was a pro-Linux (rather than > an anti-MS) article despite the title would've saved some confusion. >
Andrew, Thank you for pointing out what I was just typing..... ;-) Dazza, I was not acting on behalf of the committee, but as a member of the list who's fed up with the level of poor advocacy SLUG portrays. Snide comments, MS bashing and flame wars really don't make the group look to good from the inside, let alone the outside. Perhaps I should have read the article, however I (not the committee) belive that advocacy issues belong on -chat... positive or not. The committee don't all buy into that, and that is cool. Perhaps in the future you could word your posts a little better to prevent misunderstandings and I will ensure that I read them before I assume based on the title. Greeno
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
