From owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jun 5 13:55:10 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BB0616A41C for ; Sun, 5 Jun 2005 13:55:10 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from mailnull@mips.inka.de) Received: from mail-in-07.arcor-online.net (mail-in-07.arcor-online.net [151.189.21.47]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B10FF43D48 for ; Sun, 5 Jun 2005 13:55:07 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from mailnull@mips.inka.de) Received: from mail-in-06-z2.arcor-online.net (mail-in-06-z2.arcor-online.net [151.189.8.18]) by mail-in-07.arcor-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9155D1E912 for ; Sun, 5 Jun 2005 15:55:05 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-in-07.arcor-online.net (mail-in-07.arcor-online.net [151.189.21.47]) by mail-in-06-z2.arcor-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5601010C9E0 for ; Sun, 5 Jun 2005 15:55:05 +0200 (CEST) Received: from kemoauc.mips.inka.de (dsl-084-056-238-113.arcor-ip.net [84.56.238.113]) by mail-in-07.arcor-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45EA31E912 for ; Sun, 5 Jun 2005 15:55:05 +0200 (CEST) Received: from kemoauc.mips.inka.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by kemoauc.mips.inka.de (8.13.3/8.12.10) with ESMTP id j55Dt4Hc064300 for ; Sun, 5 Jun 2005 15:55:04 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from mailnull@kemoauc.mips.inka.de) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by kemoauc.mips.inka.de (8.13.3/8.13.1/Submit) id j55Dt4Ir064299 for freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org; Sun, 5 Jun 2005 15:55:04 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from mailnull) From: naddy@mips.inka.de (Christian Weisgerber) Date: Sun, 5 Jun 2005 13:55:03 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <429EF96E.16172.33600ABA@localhost> <20050602180147.GA790@anarion> <2fd864e05060308544bc66225@mail.gmail.com> Originator: naddy@mips.inka.de (Christian Weisgerber) To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Negative Review of FreeBSD 5.4 X-BeenThere: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD Evangelism List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 05 Jun 2005 13:55:10 -0000 Astrodog wrote: > If you aren't familier enough with something to evaluate it, you > shouldn't review it. On the other hand, the reviewer should be neutral, which in this area is strongly at odds with familiarity of the review subject. > I've done plenty of evaluations of software for customers of mine, > and I certainly don't just go through the install process, say "This > sucks" and move on to the next product. I'm sorry, but you are not in a position to judge your own review process. For that we need a third party observer. And for all I know, the producers of the software you evaluated might be aghast at your process. > I'm aware writing a review is incredibly difficult, however, I would > suggest that one simply not write a review, if they are unwilling, or > unable to meet the standard required by the technical audience their > review is targeted at. Which is why reviews are written by those who don't have these qualms. -- Christian "naddy" Weisgerber naddy@mips.inka.de