On Thu, 2007-05-17 at 13:16 +0200, Matej Cepl wrote: > On 2007-05-15, 19:53 GMT, Mauriat M wrote: > > Must I contribute to expect a somewhat stable and useful > > general purpose operating system? > > Must you? No. Should you? Yes, either time, work, or money. In assertive fashion, trying using "it would be better if" as opposed to a "should". "Shoulding" and "must-erbation" is considered aggressive and one way communication. (read "Elements of Criminal Thinking") It could happen that there are users that have no business messing with anything and we'd all be properly grateful that they don't. <g> But a "should" puts the onus of active participation on them and then they do. Which results in a batch of emails to the list to remedy a blown up system. THEN, after much grief for everyone, they leave to freshly install Ubuntu or SuSe and claim it is SO much better, as it "works", out of the box. Sure it does, they haven't screwed with it yet. <cackles> Plus, a newbie needs to have the space to actually use and become familiar with Linux, before anyone can expect them to actually be grateful for anything and appreciate it. I think it would be better to leave the moral "shoulds" at the door. So, Mauriat might have been asking "Must I?" in a completely different light, as I have outlined. The basic "morality play" of the Linux Religion becomes more apparent with exposure and use. :) Ric
