[PLUG] Conclusion to PDXLUG argument

[Cliff Wells]

On Wed, 2004-01-21 at 06:34, Felix Lee wrote:
> Cliff Wells <clifford.wells at comcast.net>:
> > Understandable.  In fact, I pointed that out very early on in this
> > discussion.  I strongly suspect that this thread (in its many
> > incarnations over the last several months) has done far more damage to
> > PLUG than some potential naming confusion ever will.
> 
> but... earlier you admitted to deliberately adding fuel to the
> flamewar and prolonging the thread.  does this mean you admit to
> deliberately harming PLUG?

Not at all.  I'm quite aware that PLUG consists of a large and mostly
reasonably crowd of people who are here because they share a common
interest in an operating system.  I think I've clearly stated my
intention here, which is to get a small but vocal minority to shut up
about something that doesn't really affect PLUG as a whole, only their
own interests.  Early in my postings (and after this thread was at least
a day old all on its own [and simply a rehash of earlier threads on both
lists]) I pointed out the inconsistency of the claims of those who said
that they were concerned that PDXLUG was damaging PLUG in some
ill-defined fashion while they themselves were demonstrably damaging it
themselves (via the announcements of people abandoning the list).  I
don't really care one way or the other about PLUG, but I was under the
(apparently mistaken) impression that they did.

> I think the thread is pretty harmless, so it doesn't particularly
> bother me.  but you seem to be inconsistent here.

Fair enough.  Hopefully this clears it up for you.


Regards,
Cliff

-- 
My only regret is that I ever was born
                               -Swans