REPOST lharc102A Part 01/04 BSD Unix to Amiga archives

[D'Arcy J.M. Cain]

In article <1991Jan19.012025.12536 at zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> Kent Paul Dolan writes:
>Perfectly simple: alt.sources is for _sources_; that says something about
>contents, not about format.  Over the years, and with experience, most folks
> [...]
>The insistance by some folks on clear text transmission of sources seems
>mostly to be an unwillingness to learn how to deal with available tools,
>whatever the stated motives may be.

*FLAME FUCKING ON*
Kent, I believe you have crossed the line with that statement.  Argue if
you will the advantages of one or another method of posting but please
don't suggest that those who disagree with you are lying, lazy or stupid
unless you have some proof.  I, and most people I know who prefer clear
text source posting (CTSP), have no trouble using all the tools you suggest.
We argue for CTSP for exactly the reasons that we state.  If you have proof
that the case is otherwise then please present it.

*REDUCE FLAME INTENSITY*
Also it is impolite to change the follow-up line without mentioning it in
the body of the message.

*FLAME OFF*
When I see a source posting that sounds interesting I always scan it to see
what it is like.  First I look at the readme file and if still interested I
check out some of the code.  Throwing a bunch of factors together I make a
decision about whether to keep it or pass.  I don't necessarily throw away
something if it is uuencoded but the odds against keeping it rise.  I also
post all my sources in CTSP making sure that the readme file is the first
thing in the file.  I appreciate it when others do the same for me.

-- 
D'Arcy J.M. Cain (darcy at druid)     |
D'Arcy Cain Consulting             |   There's no government
West Hill, Ontario, Canada         |   like no government!
+1 416 281 6094                    |