Re: SEUL: Stopping X

[The Thought Assassin <assassin@sleepless.south.networx.net.au>]

On Wed, 18 Feb 1998, Cyberdyn wrote:
> Moved to UI.
But i am posting this reply to seul-project, since I am apologising for
criticising Kevin Forge, which I did in a post to seul-project.

> On 18-Feb-98 The Thought Assassin wrote:
> - -> Kevin Forge wrote:
> - ->> ( startex only works when X is down )
> - -> ??? you can run startx whenever. you can't run two Xs on the same VC, but
> - -> you can run as many copies of startx as you like (that is to say, there is
> - -> a limit, but you wouldn't like to try to reach it)
> Everybody makes mistakes and forgets functions in Linux.  A lot easier to do
> than in Windoze' limited interface.  However, I have seen some pretty strange
> comments from some of our list members that only make me wonder how familiar
> they really are with the topics they are so feverishly arguing.
> Not to come down too hard, but if you are going to make a statement
> about something that is very fundemental at least RTFM and make sure
> you're right, specially if you know you really don't have that much
> experience in the topic.

OK, time for me to bow sorrowfully to Kevin.... Kevin made this perfectly
reasonable mistake (as you say, everyone makes mistakes) in an email he
sent to me, which I assumed was a seul-project post. In replying to the
project list, I made it appear that he was making this statement to the
list, and as such, deserving the criticism he is getting....
He does not. This was a private email, and Kevin should not be being
admonished for making (in Cyberdyn's words)
"pretty strange comments that only make me wonder how familiar they really
are with the topics they are so feverishly arguing."

Instead, it is I that is at fault, breaking the most basic rules of
netiquette in posting private mail onto a list.
I humbly apologise.

> - -> The loop of death is not inherent in XDM - 
> Exactly right.  It was a problem caused by two programs expecting the other to
> do the right thing.  It boils down to a missing link, as in a chain link.  
> And I put a link in there for them.

> - -> I challenge anyone to prove
> - -> that it is - they will probably see the flaw in their reasoning as they
> - -> write....

> Democracy is a form of government that substitutes election by the
> incompetent many for appointment by the corrupt few.
We don't have a democracy, we have a two-party system. political parties,
particularly in an oligopoly, are anathema to democracy.

-Greg Bastow( WAAY offtopic; replying to .sigs :)