Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.cs.su.oz.au!metro!metro!munnari.OZ.AU!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!news.wildstar.net!serv.hinet.net!news.uoregon.edu!tezcat!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!howland.erols.net!agate!news.Stanford.EDU!usenet From: Russ Allbery <rra@cs.stanford.edu> Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc,news.groups Subject: Re: Why you should not vote NO for comp.unix.bsd.openbsd Date: 12 Feb 1997 21:12:45 -0800 Organization: The Eyrie Lines: 61 Sender: eagle@cyclone.stanford.edu Message-ID: <qum914tmgqa.fsf@cyclone.stanford.edu> References: <5dr60e$rk2@news.pacifier.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: cyclone.stanford.edu X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.3/Emacs 19.34 Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc:5431 news.groups:9429 In news.groups, Jason Downs <downsj@threadway.teeny.org> writes: > The second CFV for the comp.unix.bsd.openbsd newsgroups was recently > posted to comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc; the first one was also posted to > comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.announce. > These groups were posted to in addition to the groups listed in the CFV, > without approval or knowledge of the group proponents or of the OpenBSD > organization in general. > As far as we can tell, the additional posting was requested by David > Lawrence; we do not know what his reasoning for this was. You would if you had been reading your e-mail. The groups were added because they are potentially interested readers of the new newsgroups or potentially interested in the change to Usenet that the creation of the new group would cause. You yourself support that in your very next paragraph. David Lawrence mailed the proponents and told them that in precisely as many words, and in reply got accusations of lying, bias, attempting to throw the vote, and so forth. > Regardless, we believe that it is in the best interest of the NetBSD > Community to refrain from simply voting "NO" in response to the CFV. It > is common, for instance, to find OpenBSD developers reading and posting > to the NetBSD newsgroups for lack of a better forum, often to the > chagrin of the NetBSD Community. Hence, the NetBSD community has an interest in this newsgroup creation vote, since if it passes they may consider it an improvement in the signal to noise ratio of their groups to not have to filter out postings about OpenBSD which they (presumably) are not interested in. In other words, they may have very good reasons to vote *for* the proposed group. This is standard practice for newsgroup creations, and a very standard reason for crossposting CFVs and RFDs. The only unfortunate thing about the entire situation is that no one noticed the newsgroups which should have obviously been included in the original RFD crossposting until later on in the process. And, on the subject of whatever internal political BS between the BSD development groups is prompting all of this, I'm extremely disappointed in the proponents of the new newsgroups and in whoever else is prompting or continuing that. We're all computer professionals. We're all presumably adults. There is absolutely no call to act like whining children fighting over a toy, regardless of what disagreements of policy there may be between different development organizations. I entirely agree with part of your message, namely that all readers of the CFV should carefully consider the issues and vote on that basis, not on the basis of some political squabble, and that unless there is something actually *wrong* with the new groups people shouldn't vote no on them. The purpose of a no vote is to indicate that the newsgroup would be *bad* for Usenet in some fashion, not to indicate that one is not interested in the subject. If not enough people are interested in the subject, the group will fail due to a lack of yes votes. I also am confident that the NetBSD community is more intelligent, informed, and mature than you are apparently giving them credit for. -- Russ Allbery (rra@cs.stanford.edu) <URL:http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>