Xref: utzoo alt.folklore.computers:7620 comp.misc:10694
Path: utzoo!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!uunet!timbuk!cs.umn.edu!sctc.com!smith
From: smith@sctc.com (Rick Smith)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers,comp.misc
Subject: Re: MULTICS and the Jargon File
Message-ID: <1990Dec3.193049.8771@sctc.com>
Date: 3 Dec 90 19:30:49 GMT
References: <1YfTW4#8MK9Xf8YJtZH970VXl0fFB3R=eric@snark.thyrsus.com>
Organization: Secure Computing Technology Corporation
Lines: 29

eric@snark.thyrsus.com (Eric S. Raymond) writes:

>Hah. Well, now I'm truly damned if I do and damned if I don't. A netter
>who shall remain nameless wrote:

>> ... hatred of MULTICS ...
>>If you try to make things fair,  you'll ruin it.

The problem here is that the jargon file is one of the classic repositories
of religous and theolgical thought on the essential goodness of one thing
or another.  The unnamed netter *is* right, in one sense, it isn't fair to
pretend that everyone loved Multics. Those of ITS have every right to sneer
at Multics -- they didn't like it and they DID something about it, heading
off in a completely different direction.

On the other hand, I felt incensed because I thought the anti-Multics feeling
had increased in the new version over what I recalled from years past. The
old entry describing HBD made it sound as if only certain dumb things were
being condemned rather than the whole system. I assumed that the changes were
caused by recent copy editing and fading memories.

As for "ruining" the jargon file, that depends on what its purpose is. I don't
think it should be limited to the point of view of its founders, any more than
it should be limited to the set of words it originally described. If you're
asking the net for opinions, then you're saying it will be a reflection of
the net, and not just the apostles or heretics or whatever that started it.

Rick.
smith@sctc.com   Arden Hills, Minnesota


Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com