Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.os.386bsd.apps:1668 comp.os.386bsd.development:3174 comp.os.386bsd.misc:5326 comp.unix.bsd:16120
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!msunews!uwm.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!cs.utexas.edu!news.cs.utah.edu!news.provo.novell.com!park.uvsc.edu!usenet
From: Terry Lambert <terry@cs.weber.edu>
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.apps,comp.os.386bsd.development,comp.os.386bsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd
Subject: Re: Cannons Away: Vote NO on newsgroup reformation.
Date: 11 Feb 1995 03:56:23 GMT
Organization: Utah Valley State College, Orem, Utah
Lines: 36
Message-ID: <3hhch7$g53@park.uvsc.edu>
References: <D3o5Ew.8x2@nbn.com> <3heq4t$mun@kong.UU.NET>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hecate.artisoft.com
rick@kong.UU.NET (Rick Adams) wrote:
] > UUNET has been, for sometime, a sponsor of BSDI.
] > BSDI, as you know, is the commercial venture of 386bsd.
]
]
] UUNET has no relationship with BSDI other than as a happy customer.
]
] Sorry to destroy your conspiracy theories.
Is this true?
I was under the impression from some email I exchanged with Rob
Kolstad of BSDI after some statements by Bill Jolitz in his initial
call for a boycott of UUNET that there was a fiscal relationship.
Has this been dissolved since late 1992 (the time of the exchange,
and yes, I still have it, and an original set of 386BSD release
notes for 0.1 calling for a boycott on the basis of the
relationship).
I would think that Jesus, a long time associate of Bill's, would
have gotten this correct.
The only reason I personally maintained the argument about UUNET
was relative to its potential partiality and influence in the
voting process. With the relationship to BSDI existant, there
would seem to be a potential for bias.
This in light of Kaleb Keithly's reference to "The Usenet Cabal".
Terry Lambert
terry@cs.weber.edu
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.