From owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Tue Jun 16 16:00:14 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36BC83405CA for ; Tue, 16 Jun 2020 16:00:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jerry@seibercom.net) Received: from mail-qk1-x72d.google.com (mail-qk1-x72d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::72d]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "GTS CA 1O1" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 49mXwF0XR2z4FQS for ; Tue, 16 Jun 2020 16:00:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jerry@seibercom.net) Received: by mail-qk1-x72d.google.com with SMTP id c185so19628899qke.7 for ; Tue, 16 Jun 2020 09:00:12 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=seibercom.net; s=google; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:reply-to :organization:mime-version; bh=YRswazzHmbEb7ismmwYPP15W3ED67i8PKQgRmi5Aji0=; b=S8tBksQfolMb+8QuGExA5wBireqM83a6+0J9UWw1qsSunWEvnqBbCgk/8plcKt0HDA i+oLMm4c/YP++occOFixfh0pQefezoUf8fWqwMFtdkTOTwJtdVibBVcB9MKFvP5DGMrU BGF9XMq4d73oe9g/MmHvwgHCEwp6LLtkjRbKY= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to :references:reply-to:organization:mime-version; bh=YRswazzHmbEb7ismmwYPP15W3ED67i8PKQgRmi5Aji0=; b=jM6B7CNvIfXsUqOJxIRkuuUEE9OR2hgMKt7nqPLvV3rPYlV7QOcOKFoqA3CRroZlJS E3x3oAes7TijFscsRZIiXV/LDCd9epPcJWDDrJDNHtipIh4U7uJSu2iEBL2Bi11ucZSv zZcUOJlNfNpM322Dgwfio1/pYHJ3L9bBKcBenZ3sDT99LPgsUq7B9IyvkjQG86/1Rr1m pX0dZV3a/4J2+zxRhOoyj6jsDP10bsQcVaN2JV0AcM1EfiDwyAozhgstv0ulYlOF3osi TM0ToIqFFdwNCuJLYG8JEscLrXtDPxzEvlfUcamHqYmP/iFFUYwHrcM8clWYLLoFJotf r0Ag== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531PGTQ1nZvM5/TSjTBtW07SewghQF3OKycS01l0wM6sa9IchpEF oPFF/S1gz5yxAVuLxiU/fb3op0WS0aE= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz22ZUhCzKFNzgAew4JfogTl5W27O7fw0BAGjvT6yboUiYY00DzvxljsdUbg5AuqL/LnvK/4w== X-Received: by 2002:a37:67c7:: with SMTP id b190mr20174958qkc.228.1592323209607; Tue, 16 Jun 2020 09:00:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from scorpio.seibercom.net (cpe-174-109-231-236.nc.res.rr.com. [174.109.231.236]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id p63sm14056246qkf.50.2020.06.16.09.00.07 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 16 Jun 2020 09:00:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (hp-envy.seibercom.net [192.168.1.102]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: jerry@seibercom.net) by scorpio.seibercom.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 49mXw113tLz4SH4 for ; Tue, 16 Jun 2020 12:00:01 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2020 11:59:51 -0400 From: Jerry To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Mailing List Etiquette was freebsd vs. netbsd Message-ID: <20200616115951.00005528@seibercom.net> In-Reply-To: <20200616170906.9c0bb6c7.freebsd@edvax.de> References: <20200613154409.GA89618@neutralgood.org> <13115.1592302784@segfault.tristatelogic.com> <20200616071153.00006f4d@seibercom.net> <20200616075548.000066f1@seibercom.net> <20200616140416.bd7b8bf2.freebsd@edvax.de> <20200616142043.7d599458.freebsd@edvax.de> <20200616144141.6203d978e9bd43418b17dcbc@sohara.org> <20200616170906.9c0bb6c7.freebsd@edvax.de> Reply-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Organization: seibercom.net X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.17.4 (GTK+ 2.24.32; i686-w64-mingw32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; boundary="Sig_/nPBHcik2xitirF6L23_T7ms"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 49mXwF0XR2z4FQS X-Spamd-Bar: ++ Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=pass header.d=seibercom.net header.s=google header.b=S8tBksQf; dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of jerry@seibercom.net designates 2607:f8b0:4864:20::72d as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=jerry@seibercom.net X-Spamd-Result: default: False [2.56 / 15.00]; HAS_REPLYTO(0.00)[freebsd-questions@freebsd.org]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip6:2607:f8b0:4000::/36]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; HAS_ORG_HEADER(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[4]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[seibercom.net:+]; RECEIVED_SPAMHAUS_PBL(0.00)[174.109.231.236:received]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+,1:+,2:~]; ASN(0.00)[asn:15169, ipnet:2607:f8b0::/32, country:US]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; REPLYTO_EQ_TO_ADDR(5.00)[]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-0.91)[-0.914]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[seibercom.net:s=google]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-0.99)[-0.994]; MIME_GOOD(-0.20)[multipart/signed,text/plain]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-questions@freebsd.org]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[seibercom.net]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; NEURAL_SPAM_SHORT(0.07)[0.071]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[2607:f8b0:4864:20::72d:from]; GREYLIST(0.00)[pass,meta]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[] X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.33 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2020 16:00:14 -0000 --Sig_/nPBHcik2xitirF6L23_T7ms Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, 16 Jun 2020 17:09:06 +0200, Polytropon commented: >Interesting apoach. Do you value presentation more than content? >In case of support, personally I would want something that helps >me solving my problem, not something that looks good. Sadly, the >"looks good" has lead to many technically inferior solutions >becoming a de-facto standard, because the better solutions simply >"don't look as good". That reminds me of a story I heard a long time ago pertaining to "perceived quality". If you happen to fall off a ship into the ocean, do you really care it the life preserve thrown to you is a bright, shinny new one, or just one that works? I have seen a few users here claim if they receive a transmission and it is not in the format that they approve of, they will delete it. Now, allow me to say this as nicely as I possible can. If some entity wants to send an electronic document formated with a 200 character line length, R2L with the characters inverted, that is their right. If the intended recipient chooses to discard that communication, that is their right. ".eussi eht no susnesnoc a ot emoc ot gniog reve era ew yaw on si ereht dna= retrats-on a si tI ?daerht siht no emit gnitsaw ew era lleh eht yhW" ,nois= ulcnoc nI --=20 Jerry --Sig_/nPBHcik2xitirF6L23_T7ms Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEEIQb/tTwl6I1ueEVtOHMGOIfexWQFAl7o7HkACgkQOHMGOIfe xWTsNAgAzk7oqk0P8lo73RGbMClvrayqMWBghnvSmF85c3+tbE1WRbTuBQqWkoe4 NHh7HOsUPkfo6d92uQL+92+JrfJDhGRZRPeayBNSsxFbL2dh3e9LRiJYGxwHo9T/ DCaszJF+RVnwHX6PJ+5zOC0/It8JG8R/7+wXnBq8mvtm2fBaCDqeZhoCPDiW1oU8 T3k2UcjZWDGsHn26dYiNuLFn+gdrB3Q70/6WKnHlXX8GAXOzxLETVxRkqcuZZpLW 3xnjfW+lVTIMORFE5GP08bBpg3DkHHw2rETXRPYKC/s+cb4gWLcxzOYdM0U6nR2y Uog3xm9tWjJ0SB9Grq9cd7D9Do9ddQ== =gXd8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/nPBHcik2xitirF6L23_T7ms--