> I would also like to note that there is a possibility that I am going
> to be the only one to post to this thread in this manner , since
> people of my bent were told by Luke that any form of "re-hashing"
> would be summarily deleted.  I realize why he did this, but because
> he did so, the only people who have so far posted are pro-rc.d*,

There's a much simpler reason why only pro-rc.d stuff has shown up: the
people who don't like rc.d have been told, about as clearly as
possible, that NetBSD is not interested in supporting us.  Why should
we throw good effort after bad?

> Luke actually said something like 'Please post constructive
> critisism, and not flame"

Which is not an unreasonable request.  The problem with it in this
regard is that the pro-rc.d people are unwilling or unable to
acknowledge that the anti-rc.d people are worth supporting (or at least
that's what _I_ got out of the discussion last time around).  Thus,
about the only constructive criticism we can offer - "we need it to
support this thing that it presently doesn't" - is viewed as nothing
more than pointless repetitive griping opposing Progress.  And after a
while, there really _isn't_ anything we can say that hasn't already
been beaten to death several times over.

In short, we were told to go away, so we've gone away.  Where's the
surprise?

> I am concerned about this because when a small group of people who
> are all enthusiastic about a particular concept get together, they
> tend to brainstorm with each other, and not offer viewpoints that
> people who are skeptical might.

If you really want to go into this again, please, before you throw more
kerosene on the fire, go read the tech-userlevel archives back about
the time rc was split up.  It's not more than a few months ago, and it
will probably enlighten you about why you haven't seen contributions
from anti-rc.d people.

					der Mouse

			       mouse@rodents.montreal.qc.ca
		     7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39  4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B