Okay heres the deal. Oh and I don't spell and I don't use spell checkers, feel
the pain. :>
We aren't rivals. But we definately aren't going to be doing much with
each other. Our reasons for doing the same things are exact polar opposites
it seems. SIGLinux is made up of mostly "Linux Ethusiasts" who subscribe to
this mailing list, and welcome everyone, even non-"Linux Ethusiasts" with
open arms. We are willing to help anyone, thats how we've been since day one,
but I'm getting ahead of my self. Their motives.. hrmm thats a fishy one.
Patrick its not that we want to be the only group. I think we all need to
here a little story.
First of all when they came into existance, I was still president of SIGLinux
and I attended there first meeting. Where they made up the lie that SIGLinux
doesn't cater to newbies.. Hrmm... check
http://www.mail-archive.com/siglinux%40locutus.csres.utexas.edu/
seems to me we've been helping newbies of all levels for longer than these
people even knew what linux or unix was.
So I corrected them politely during there meeting about how what they just
said was incorrect. Their response? "Oh sorry well we didn't know that.. but
we're a business organization .. so thats our Angle.." Fine, even though they
just made the assumption that since we're SIGLinux, funded by a CS
organization, we must be elitest, assholes.. which would of quickly fixed had
they ever really made any attempt to find out what the deal was with SIGLinux
rather than fabricate FUD...
Or perhaps if they had ever used Unix or seeked help from any Unix community
wether local or on the net. They might of realized that Unix groups tend
to be pretty open-arms.. oh well.. (Oh they did use Linux, one of the three
founders did anyway. he installed WinLinux 2000 before their first meeting
but still had no real proficiency)
But secondly, they recanted and said they were a business organization, hrmm
well why are you called "Unix/Linux Association" .. False advertising I feel.
.. No mention of business or MIS or anything that they supposedly do.
And I don't believe they will ever change their name since it doesn't look as
important if you don't call your self "The UT Unix/Linux Association" sort of
giving the impression your the main Unix Group on campus.. but whatever..
I can deal with the name I guess..
They still had a chance to make me believe they could live in harmony and
even cooperate with us. But I guess they kind of ruined that now.
Hows that you say?
Well they've continued to lie about SIGLinux after being informed.. and just
recently they send an e-mail to our list, again restating the lie "SIGLinux doesn't
help newbies." Hrmm....
Well now you see.. all in all it seems that me, Ex-El-Presidente seems to
think one thing about this organization and thats a four letter word -- Hrmm :>
-Omar
On Mon, Feb 26, 2001 at 11:58:28AM -0600, Patrick Goetz wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Feb 2001, Paul Sack wrote:
> > First of all, please word-wrap to 72 characters/line.
> >
>
> Or use an MUA written some time after 1972; either approach will solve the
> problem. :-)
>
>
> > On Thu, 22 Feb 2001, Patrick Lang wrote:
> >
> > > I've had some people ask why we have a Linux organization separate
> > > from SIGlinux, and it not based off of any sort of ill-feelings or
> > > disagreements.
> >
> > So why are there at least 40 of these flyers in the electrical eng.
> > building?
> >
>
>
> I'm a little late on this, but I fail to see the utility of this
> discussion. It would seem to me that this campus is plenty big for any
> number of linux groups. For example, if the school of art wanted to have a
> linux group focused on the use of gimp and 3-D rendering tools available
> on linux, would someone object to this, too? If the B school wants to
> have their own linux organization, then I say more power to them. Since
> when did using linux qualify anyone to demand dictatorial territorial
> jurisdiction?
>
>
>
> ***********************************************************************
> The nationwide online survey by Ohio-based Progressive Insurance found
> that 45 percent of married Americans ranked their cars as the thing
> they considered most important to them.
>
> In answer to separate questions regarding their preferences, only 6
> percent rated their children as important and just 10 percent said their
> spouse or significant other was important to them, the survey said.
>
> The survey, conducted Jan. 5-15 and based on answers from 516
> respondents, found that 84 percent of Americans love their cars while
> 32 percent have actually given their four-wheeled gas-guzzler a name.
>
> Seventeen percent of male participants planned to buy their vehicle
> a gift on Valentine's Day, the poll said.
> ***********************************************************************
> _ Patrick Goetz
> _| ~-. Dept. of Mathematics
> \, *_} The University of Texas at Austin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> \( Austin, Texas 78712-1084 Phone: (512) 232-2746
> http://www.ma.utexas.edu/users/pgoetz
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Send administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Send administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
