Stupid end-user tricks: darcs for /etc and /boot

[Daniel Carrera]

Alexander Skwar wrote:
> I didn't take it personally - what makes you think so?

You looked like you did.

> But what he wrote was just not true and sounded very much
> like FUD. Is it wrong to call things by their names?

Saying that a program in Gentoo doesn't work is not FUD. It really 
isn't. FUD is an attempt to spread uncertainty over a product, to make 
people not use it. It is a marketing ploy to keep customers from 
switching. But we can't allow just any statement that we disagree with 
to be labeled FUD because we run the risk of closing off valid 
criticism. One user says that this program has wrecked his /etc/ 
directory. This is valid criticism, unless you're going to accuse him of 
lying, which is quite an accusation. Just because the program has worked 
well for you, it doesn't mean that it works well for everybody.

> Yes, that was what he wrote. And it's plain wrong. You don't
> accidentally type "-5<enter>".

The poster disagrees with you, and what you are saying is not filling me 
with confidence.

> Sure, *could* happen - but in
> the same way, the Ubuntu partition tools make it easy to wipe
> your system, if you're not careful.

Yes they do. And it is not FUD to say that fdisk can totally wreck your 
system if you are not careful. It is actually a very true statement.

> I suppose you'd agree that it would be right to call Ubuntu
> dangerous, wouldn't you? Well - I would not. IMO, this would
> be stupid FUD.

Okay, so we agree on the point of contention. Saying that fdisk can 
wreck your system and you should be careful is actually good advice, it 
is true, and it is not FUD. It's not reasonable to complain when someone 
says a risky command should be used with caution, and it is very 
unreasonable to call that FUD. This is not what FUD is.

>> if you disagree with the poster. I wouldn't like people to call FUD when 
>> I complain about Dapper's stability either.
> 
> Depends. If you've got solid facts,

I it crashed on me, that's solid enough to complain. That is not FUD.

>> That sort of attitude only blinds us to real issues.
> 
> What attitude? To dislike FUD?

To call anything negative FUD. If you call FUD every time you dislike 
what someone says about your favourite system all you'll do is ignore 
valid criticism and dilute the meaning of the word FUD.

Cheers,
Daniel.
-- 
http://opendocumentfellowship.org
   "The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the
   unreasonable man tries to adapt the world to himself.
   Therefore all progress depends on unreasonable men."
         -- George Bernard Shaw