On Mar 29, 2003 at 11:23, Ravindra Jaju wrote:
The content of your mail *implied* that since UUASC does it, it's a good model to follow. Hence the question. Otherwise, how is the statement 'That's what UUASC does.' related to this post?
UUASC is a vaguely similar organisation. The method works for them. It may work for us.
But, if I am asking for forking with reasons, shouldn't you too give reasons in support of your views? Doesn't it make sense? Your mail is
Only if I want to _convince_ you :-)
Splitting a list based on anything other than commercial/noncommercial does not make sense to me. The job split is the only concrete split that I can think of. How do you say whether a question is general or technical or what? A commercial message is easier to identify as being commercial.
Of course, to make things clear (as was implied in another mail), nothing like a 'dogfight' here.
Certainly not. Some people get strange ideas.
I think we have lost the art of arguing, assuming that arguing and confronting are synonymous. No!
That was a point I tried to make earlier. Forget confrontation, I didn't even want to argue.