Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!cica!iuvax!bsu-cs!bsu-ucs!00prneubauer
From: 00prneubauer@bsu-ucs.uucp (Paul Neubauer)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: Why the politics
Message-ID: <52451@bsu-ucs.uucp>
Date: 13 Dec 90 09:31:36 GMT
References: <9012122154.AA24034@mole.ai.mit.edu>
Followup-To: gnu.g++.help
Organization: Ball State University, Muncie, In - Univ. Computing Svc's
Lines: 50

In article <9012122154.AA24034@mole.ai.mit.edu>, rms@AI.MIT.EDU 
(Richard Stallman) writes:
> Promoting a different attitude is what the GNU project is all about.
> This is not done by force--people can keep that attitude if they want
> to.  However, if they disagree with the aims of the GNU project, the
> proper place for them to say so is on gnu.misc.discuss.  That's the
> group for discussing whether the aims and methods of the GNU project
> are good ones.  The other GNU newsgroups/mailing lists are for
> *carrying out* the work of the GNU project--to attain both the
> immediate technical subgoals, and the ultimate social goals.

Whether I agree or disagree with the aims of the GNU project and/or of the FSF,
or even whether I can determine to what extent I agree and/or disagree with
these aims is completely irrelevant to any discussion I can imagine on the
features/merits/syntax/semantics/etc of the c++ language.  It does seem,
however, that rms does not exactly practice what he preaches and restrict
meta-discussion to groups like gnu.misc.discuss, but instead feels free to
inject discussions of topics like software patents into newsgroups like
comp.lang.c++ regardless of specific relevance.  This is not to say that I do
not find these discussions interesting, nor to say that I am unsympathetic to
his points.  It is merely that I fail to see the specific RELEVANCE of this
discussion to the c++ language.  I realize that gnu mailing lists are not "the
net" and that even if we were actually dealing only with a netnews newsgroup,
there is no mechanism for restricting people from posting any message in any
newsgroup, *even if it were desireable*.  In any case, I have neither the power
nor the desire to restrict rms from posting anything he wants to in what are
effectively his own mailing lists. On the other hand, this is exactly why the
gnu.* mailing lists, etc. SHOULD be decoupled from comp.lang.c++.  

If rms's mailing list were decoupled from comp.lang.c++, then flamage for
irrelevancy would become more appropriate, like the flames apparently received
by the guy who recently posted a (large) item about something called "mud" to
rec.games.go.  If I want to read about stupid adventure games, then I will read
whatever newsgroups are appropriate to that topic, I should not have to weed
out irrelevancies from the groups that I do read.  Similarly, (and NOT to
compare the level of interest or intelligence displayed with "mud" :-) if I or
anyone wants to read about the c++ language, then we should not have to weed
out articles about software patents, which have nothing in particular to do
with c++, however much importance they have for the field of computing as a
whole.  (In fact, I happen to agree with rms that the issue is an important one
and merits discussion.  It is simply that I disagree on whether the c++
newsgroup is the best place for that discussion.)

In short, on the subject of whether to decouple the gnu.* mailing lists from
comp.lang.c++, I concur that they should be separated.

========
Paul Neubauer	neubauer@bsu-cs.bsu.edu         00prneubauer@bsu-ucs.bsu.edu
                neubauer@bsu-cs.UUCP            00prneubauer@bsu-ucs.UUCP
                                                00PRNEUBAUER@BSUVAX1.BITNET