Re: [SLE] Is SCO damaging SuSE's business?
From: Anders Karlsson (anders_at_trudheim.com)
Date: 07/23/03
- Previous message: Paul Benjamin: "Re: [SLE] Official GCC-3.3 (Was: Re: [suse-security] Problems with k_deflt-2.4.19-329 and IPSEC)"
- In reply to: me_at_prestoncrawford.com: "Re: [SLE] Is SCO damaging SuSE's business?"
- Next in thread: me_at_prestoncrawford.com: "Re: [SLE] Is SCO damaging SuSE's business?"
- Reply: me_at_prestoncrawford.com: "Re: [SLE] Is SCO damaging SuSE's business?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
To: me@prestoncrawford.com Date: 23 Jul 2003 17:06:11 +0100
Right,
The question it was regarding was about SCO vs SuSE, you have had your
answer, been directed to the correct forum, reminded you had already
asked the question and received many answers in the news group. Just
drop this particular topic okay?
You have been given plenty of links to get on with by now, detailing why
people are not overly worried. If you do persist harping on about this
topic you are only going to make people less keen helping you when you
actually have a problem you need fixing.
The XFree question never came in to this discussion.
From what I can see, you are not blacklisted from the mailing list, but
some people have started taking steps filtering out your postings. That
is usually a sign to start learning from mistakes made. I believe that
you simply did not know better this time around.
Hopefully you stick around with SuSE and Linux, learn a lot and in a few
years time can start answering questions and helping newbies.
Take it easy,
On Wed, 2003-07-23 at 16:58, me@prestoncrawford.com wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Jul 2003, Anders Karlsson wrote:
>
> > I'd guess he objects to you having already been told numerous times the
> > answer to your question and you then just moving to another forum asking
> > the exact same question again.
>
> What question? If you refer to the XFree problem I was having I only got
> one person who had the right answer to that. I thanked him profusely,
> problem solved.
>
> > It'd irritate me, and I know full well I have irritated the hell out of
> > people doing exactly the same thing some 6-8 years ago, when I didn't
> > know better.
>
> I guess I'm in the "don't know better" column right now, because I've just
> asked for help a couple times and asked a question about how SuSE
> is dealing with the SCO issue and suddenly I'm a troll.
>
> In the end my life will move on if I'm essentially blacklisted here, but I
> guess I'd like to know why first and be given a chance to ammend that
> behaviour rather than being slammed and not knowing why.
>
> Preston
-- Anders Karlsson <anders@trudheim.com> Trudheim Technology Limited
- application/pgp-signature attachment: This is a digitally signed message part
- Previous message: Paul Benjamin: "Re: [SLE] Official GCC-3.3 (Was: Re: [suse-security] Problems with k_deflt-2.4.19-329 and IPSEC)"
- In reply to: me_at_prestoncrawford.com: "Re: [SLE] Is SCO damaging SuSE's business?"
- Next in thread: me_at_prestoncrawford.com: "Re: [SLE] Is SCO damaging SuSE's business?"
- Reply: me_at_prestoncrawford.com: "Re: [SLE] Is SCO damaging SuSE's business?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
|
