From owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Thu Jun 11 10:24:03 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 01FC5329CA3 for ; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 10:24:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@edvax.de) Received: from mout.kundenserver.de (mout.kundenserver.de [212.227.126.187]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mout.kundenserver.de", Issuer "TeleSec ServerPass Class 2 CA" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 49jKhd2pg8z4MVC for ; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 10:24:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@edvax.de) Received: from r56.edvax.de ([94.222.24.162]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (mreue011 [212.227.15.167]) with ESMTPA (Nemesis) id 1Mxlmw-1izuHg1uX8-00zEpA; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 12:23:58 +0200 Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2020 12:23:57 +0200 From: Polytropon To: Aryeh Friedman Cc: FreeBSD Mailing List Subject: Re: freebsd vs. netbsd Message-Id: <20200611122357.5a0a71c6.freebsd@edvax.de> In-Reply-To: References: <171506d5-19aa-359e-c21d-f07257c52ebd@freenetMail.de> <6a4f6a15-ec43-03f6-1a41-a109e445f026@anatoli.ws> <00225a04-237d-9051-9aea-12c192106a20@anatoli.ws> <373EDB20-C750-42E2-A41B-EA61F6E49807@kicp.uchicago.edu> <20200609120136.00005b3c@seibercom.net> <2393a1e0-b073-950a-78be-9f57d8e9934b@anatoli.ws> <20200610063555.00003707@seibercom.net> <82F57D0D-E0EC-49F7-824E-20A296C9F549@kicp.uchicago.edu> <250b853a-b436-0e99-b05c-9abd6b6019ef@panix.com> <20200611070630.2cb42786.freebsd@edvax.de> <20200611091449.383e1d83@archlinux> <53a6833e-db63-2395-4d2e-f05a9b1fb269@boxsci.com> Reply-To: Polytropon Organization: EDVAX X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.1.1 (GTK+ 2.24.5; i386-portbld-freebsd8.2) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:v/YuCZiJImpkbMWUeZJg/pHU4dK8P7/eUkUcu5GIo5pXORrYn+5 y2FLriSOjrEzEQakOLYH0q96l7PgAwcdnD1RZH8EKqQ4B94GLGOCrOs2U5IIO+FFpM31lGJ Hjj7SD+qLG/Ilva+jjIT/TxWKN00Sqp3qxceCXMyBqCBlgk48VhOsetQdX9U4U1zCahDjJe FjTUeHcV7ZIauJV9YLE2A== X-Spam-Flag: NO X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:BCCJq56wIpU=:ZRsbfIPkTq9l0ni2QegMoq cqD04lSfMZIEIXcrzzToLtGnZJ39cuR0BuJPxKjEHnc1U0qVww1L10UJNTSD5slThjiq0+q1q kY5BqRzF0bCD2oY7ePOyW6NRY9WgU91ownicvZcOviUI2dLUGztvQX2MVdrrZ7puxJeSBZWMt 4xtq27jo4MPEvyHL/PpRASeUGZvLHcB96veS9Z14Dnn7evmU10IWR67EenjWbaW5km+syGXRS 9eogatx/njLYyFYlC6C8Z5Eom4FGeaQ3t2FM4fUDbgPQM0mUAWYC6XP06b5uCM2S53aU/QAi4 6+nhBe4xMRiLXi7jYR20qp5GXNizPFR47hwYgF/nQeXN634esGjHcFZx9bobCaLPIWQAaFopE BRrEp/Q9t67CLdsYdKL11f7/IhGO/SGX5gn1m/jFrED8i7Ix5dfboOK2NR0uVqms1MHNuif/2 U5L8OzVv3Z2YsJG8SIiqV6exuI+BXU9yFEY9DVXksKxNWBAhkomZ+jD8v31wMcgWIXVVLMXwO XKijH9wPlPAQ0mKRo2pdLACO7H6Y1SZd4HKvixhcUIyfZf2vHwOecDQQSYXuvflJZYfQmaZq9 rdiQFCshCoTtVo357mDp5wZxpoA85jNvrdezEfyHdx+XIHqXZmvrkPZ0gzNMq8C65GTbOTG0w rlnpCjz7p0Sftsyc12KEfWTwnHJvlpwqkc1Sn2ji/hl7q0V33/F5cKl/hRwAKf92ua2GdyBsG P4pwJFmlcL9c3ijbdmUt38vC2YQuh1Tc9WIAxmbRtnKMQJuTfJsGhxM5g00ijQGZ7ZW6eXdP6 czQTnCwsea1y9GbqSXUJYwYgDa2cNzOAvoP5vV2U7ndHUbtXUMgbJXZ7Ucf2QJ35cV1FRVV X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 49jKhd2pg8z4MVC X-Spamd-Bar: +++ Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=none (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of freebsd@edvax.de has no SPF policy when checking 212.227.126.187) smtp.mailfrom=freebsd@edvax.de X-Spamd-Result: default: False [3.20 / 15.00]; HAS_REPLYTO(0.00)[freebsd@edvax.de]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; MV_CASE(0.50)[]; HAS_ORG_HEADER(0.00)[]; TO_DN_ALL(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; FREEMAIL_TO(0.00)[gmail.com]; RECEIVED_SPAMHAUS_PBL(0.00)[94.222.24.162:received]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:8560, ipnet:212.227.0.0/16, country:DE]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; REPLYTO_EQ_FROM(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; NEURAL_SPAM_SHORT(0.17)[0.171]; TAGGED_RCPT(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[edvax.de]; AUTH_NA(1.00)[]; NEURAL_SPAM_MEDIUM(0.01)[0.011]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; NEURAL_SPAM_LONG(0.62)[0.620]; MID_CONTAINS_FROM(1.00)[]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[212.227.126.187:from]; R_SPF_NA(0.00)[no SPF record]; RWL_MAILSPIKE_POSSIBLE(0.00)[212.227.126.187:from]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(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: Thu, 11 Jun 2020 10:24:03 -0000 On Thu, 11 Jun 2020 05:53:30 -0400, Aryeh Friedman wrote: > As I said before the top posting rule really does fly in the face of > convention for most non-technical/mailing list oriented mail users. Hmmm... sorry, but I think that this statement is problematic, as it contains a significant contradiction: You use the term "most non-technical/mailing list oriented mail users", but non-technical users won't use a mailing list! The use of mailing lists is quite prominent among advanced users, while non-technical users seem to prefer web forums. So more or less, you can consider anyone using a mailing list to be an advanced (or at least, not "non-technical" user). > Thus > by ramming it down people's throats (even if they are experienced users) > just adds to the aloof/arrogant reputation FreeBSD has [...] I fully agree with your observation regarding "discussion tone". However, it's sometimes helpful to remind users that this list prefers (!) the regular reply style instead of top-posting, but it is definitely not a big problem to get access to and answers from this list if one can, for whatever reason, only top-post (and even better, is aware of this problem). After all, it's _not_ a rule, it's a suggestion that arises from a consensus about preference, nothing more, nothing less. -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...