(Disclaimer: no specific comments here are aimed at any particular web
site or publication of any sort.  Also, I haven't read the original
article.)

More than once when I've tried to get a piece of work published, I've
been told that it was "insufficiently inflammatory" to drive
eyeballs/ad views.  (Don't ask me where; I still have to work in this
field!)  Some web sites are completely uninterested in honest,
researched articles and prefer hyperbole over substance.

The NetBSD community would be far better served by finding an outlet
for a well-written and well-reasoned article than by ranting about how
any one article is a piece of moose poo.

And look on the bright side of the worst case: NetBSD is getting
enough of a "name" for someone to try a hatchet job.  :-)

On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 08:09:24PM -0500, Richard Rauch wrote:
> I thought that his basis for saying that NetBSD was moving slow was because
> we have "only" reached a 1.6.2 (or, wait, according to his profound article,
> 2.6.2?)
> 
> Well, it's a shame that many readers have read this twit's remarks
> and won't see followups.
> 
> On the plus side, anyone who falls for his remarks is both uninformed and
> not capable of critical thinking, so the only real damage (and it is real)
> is the general impression of the one voice.
> 
> 
> ...of course, I think that the real reason he wrote such a shrill
> and misinformed article was to drive up readership for at least a
> short spike.
> 
> 
> -- 
>   "I probably don't know what I'm talking about."  http://www.olib.org/~rkr/

-- 
Michael Lucas		mwlucas@FreeBSD.org, mwlucas@BlackHelicopters.org
   "I'm sorry, but 'Social Darwinism' is no excuse for killing all of 
	           your co-workers."  -- Ivan Brunetti
		http://www.BlackHelicopters.org/~mwlucas/