tlug: Re: 3 questions

[Joe Marchak <joem@example.com>]

Hi Jonathan,

> I suppose if you snip out all of the preceeding technical stuff and
> leave only the last part, it could look that way.  If you don't do that,
> it's clearly a technical post addressing questions on how a bar
> code-based tracking system works, getting software for such a system,
> and whether or not it could be simultaneously mirrored.  That is clearly
> not advocacy.

This thread (and the cross-postings thread in tlug-admin before it) 
degenerated from a technical discussion to very much an advocacy
discussion.  You may have started out with something related to linux, but
it digressed to the point that it was no longer appropriate for the tlug
main list.   If you go over your posts, and Uli's subsequent posts, you
will see what I am referring to.

This is of course only my opinion, and it can be argued.  We should argue
it.  When we argue it, the arguement should also be on tlug-advocacy,
where I am more than willing to get into details with you.

You decided to leave the tlug-advocacy list in a huff over something that
Tom Haslam said (or didn't say - he apologized for the mixup, but
you probably didn't stay around long enough to read that).  That's your
decision.  But if you are going to try to bring non-technical discussions
into the other lists, I will have to voice my strong opposition to that,
since it is a step backwards.  

The cross-postings thread on tlug-admin between you and Tim was a real
indicator of what will happen if we don't strictly follow the rules that
we have.    

> Joe, one of the reasons I opposed splitting the list was because of
> differences of opinion like this.  

If we keep the main list technically-based, this won't be a problem,
because opinions will be voiced in tlug-advocacy, not tlug-main.  That
was the intent of the split. 

> When the FAQ was revised at the time the list was split, great pains
> were taken to clearly specify what constituted acceptable posts for the
> main list.  I read the revised FAQ at the time and again after reading
> your post, and there is no doubt in my mind that you are mistaken.  Of
> course, you think you're not. Perhaps you might want to re-read the FAQ
> and re-evaluate.

http://tlug.linux.or.jp/guide/tlug_user-guide.8.html:
      " There is an important distinction between tlug and 
        tlug-advocay.  The main list is for technical 
        discussions only"  (only is in bold font)

This seems very clear to me. 

I'm sorry we have to disagree on this issue, but it's been too much work
to get where we are to start going backwards.     


-Joe.


_____________________________________________________________________
Joe Marchak joem@example.com ph:03-5203-3925 fx:03-5203-3699 +813/-03
---------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------
Next Nomikai: 20 November, 19:30   Tengu TokyoEkiMae 03-3275-3691
Next Technical Meeting: 12 December, 12:30 HSBC Securities Office
----------------------------------------------------------------
more info: http://tlug.linux.or.jp Sponsors: PHT, HSBC Securities