Re: Red-tops, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

On Sat, Mar 05, 2005 at 12:21:05PM +, Henning Makholm wrote: > Scripsit Joel Aelwyn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Oooh! So the fact that I've shown up in it a few times means I'm part of > > the Cabal now? > > No, not by a large margin. I have a cabalometric experiment at >

Re: Red-tops, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

I'm very sorry but attempting to measure cabal power by frequency of discussion in public news forums is obviously naive. First and mostly because there is no cabal. On Saturday 05 March 2005 06:21 am, Henning Makholm wrote: > No, not by a large margin. I have a cabalometric experiment at >

Re: Red-tops, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

Andreas Barth wrote: > Actually, if someone thinks something should be in DWN, sending a mail > to [EMAIL PROTECTED] really helps. At least it helped for me everytime I > wanted to > have something covered. I really consider your accusations against DWN > harmful. Not sure why DWN is being discus

Re: Red-tops, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

MJ Ray wrote: > I may do that later, so for future: Does [EMAIL PROTECTED] have an archive? Yes, it's on master:/home/debian/archive/debian-dwn and readable by the Debian (800) group. Regards, Joey -- If nothing changes, everything will remain the same. -- Barne's Law -- To UNSUBSC

Re: Red-tops, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

Hi, reading some of the replies MJ[0]'s post has received, I feel it's necessary to express my opinion on some of the points. I wasn't going to at first in order to keep the noise down, but IMO some views and opinions expressed by DPL candidates have turned noise into signal. On Fri, Mar 04,

Re: Red-tops, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Yes, it's the message about my first point, where Martin Schulze > told me that in-project communication was never a goal of DWN. > This exchange illustrates my fifth point: you do not know how > DWN actually works and I don't think you can find out reliably.

Re: Red-tops, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > But one example *cannot* demonstrate your point. [...] I was referring to DWN being one example of communication in debian. > Nor, for that matter, does a Message-ID prove anything. You can't say > or remember what's in that message, can you? Y

Re: Red-tops, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > If you cannot substantiate them publicly, then they are nothing more > > than pissing in the wind. > > Get Message-Id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > that was sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] if it matters that much to you.

Re: Red-tops, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If you cannot substantiate them publicly, then they are nothing more > than pissing in the wind. Get Message-Id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> that was sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] if it matters that much to you. I don't have a copy here and I've not checked my

Re: Red-tops, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

Henning Makholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Scripsit MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Interesting, but missing any measure of whether I'm being > > kissed or kicked. > If we are talking about the same publication, then neither. For all > the time I have read DWN, its stories have consisted of neutra

Re: Red-tops, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Maybe. Call it revenge if you want, but please consider whether > > > there's truth behind them or how one can tell. > > Your accusations are, as far as I can tell, enti

Re: Red-tops, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

Scripsit MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Interesting, but missing any measure of whether I'm being > kissed or kicked. If we are talking about the same publication, then neither. For all the time I have read DWN, its stories have consisted of neutral references to threads on the mailing lists, with

Re: Red-tops, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

On Sat, Mar 05, 2005 at 01:28:43PM +, MJ Ray wrote: > Henning Makholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The list shows everybody who has more than 1000 points. You are not > > among them (except if my DWN-parsing script is broken), but MJ himself > > currently has 2661 points and a ranking of #30.

Re: Red-tops, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

Henning Makholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The list shows everybody who has more than 1000 points. You are not > among them (except if my DWN-parsing script is broken), but MJ himself > currently has 2661 points and a ranking of #30. Interesting, but missing any measure of whether I'm being kiss

Re: Red-tops, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

Scripsit Joel Aelwyn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Oooh! So the fact that I've shown up in it a few times means I'm part of > the Cabal now? No, not by a large margin. I have a cabalometric experiment at . The rules: Each time DWN links to

Re: Red-tops, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Maybe. Call it revenge if you want, but please consider whether > > there's truth behind them or how one can tell. > Your accusations are, as far as I can tell, entirely false. Can you tell? I know at least one

Re: Red-tops, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Maybe. Call it revenge if you want, but please consider whether > there's truth behind them or how one can tell. Your accusations are, as far as I can tell, entirely false. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Troub

Re: Red-tops, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Actually, if someone thinks something should be in DWN, sending a mail > to [EMAIL PROTECTED] really helps. It helps to get a reply a month later with inaccurate inflated rewrites. > At least it helped for me everytime I wanted to have something covered.

Re: Red-tops, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

* MJ Ray ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050304 12:55]: > Henning Makholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Scripsit MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > * They have friends who get puffed regularly, but "good news" > > > stories about groups on the blacklist can get ignored and/or > > > stuffed at the bottom of

Re: Red-tops, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 01:26:20AM +, MJ Ray wrote: > > * They have friends who get puffed regularly, but "good news" > stories about groups on the blacklist can get ignored and/or > stuffed at the bottom of the issue. Oooh! So the fact that I've shown up in it a few times means I'm part

Re: Red-tops, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

Henning Makholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Scripsit MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > * Neither feels that the groups it reports on are their main > > audience. > As far as I can see, the main audience of DWN is Debian developers, > package maintainers, and other members of the community. This aud

Re: Red-tops, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 03:17:16AM +, Henning Makholm wrote: > > It's worrying that other groups think similar "Newsletter of Record" > > publications will help them and so make rods for their own backs. > > Dude, what is your *problem*? The problem includes DWN misreporting the more insane d

Re: Red-tops, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

MJR wrote: >Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I'll leave the rest of your bile to someone else, but for the record, as >> the founder of DWN, I resent the implication that the newsleatter is >> modeled on a US tabloid, which I have never read (except for headlines >> about two-headed cows whi

Re: Red-tops, was: Clarification about krooger's platform

Scripsit MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Why? There are more than a few similarities, by luck or not: I cannot recognize DWN at all in your description. > * Neither feels that the groups it reports on are their main > audience. As far as I can see, the main audience of DWN is Debian developers,