[CentOS] Why is yum not liked by some? -- If I walked into a room and annoyed almost every person

Preston Crawford me at prestoncrawford.com
Wed Sep 14 16:54:16 UTC 2005

On Wed, 2005-09-14 at 09:38 -0700, Bryan J. Smith wrote:
> Preston Crawford <me at prestoncrawford.com> wrote:
> > Of course it was. But this isn't the first time the topic
> > of you "sporting your knowledge" has come up.
> *WHEN* did I "sport my knowledge" *1* time in this *ENTIRE*
> thread!  God, I think the only things I mentioned were:
> 1.  I always run my own, internal repositories for clients
> 2.  You have to have run your own repositories to understand
> the limits of YUM, or understand how deltas work to know they
> don't solve the problem for clients (only mirrors)

I didn't say you did, Bryan. To be honest, most of the time I ignore
your posts, because they grate on me. I simply said this isn't the first
time this topic has come up. Trying to point out that if multiple people
think you're saying things in the same manner, then is EVERYONE wrong?
That's all I was saying. That this issue has come up before.

> > And it's not EVERY PERSON on this list that is wrong.
> And I have _explicitly_ said "Select People" over and over. 
> I have explicitly said I don't care if it's "subscience" or
> "dilberate," I want it to _stop_ from "Select People." 
> People always assuming things are due to 1 person, even if
> subsconsicence and not intentional, have a nasty habit of
> becoming habit.  ;->  


> > Something to think about, at least. If I walked into a room
> > and annoyed almost every person in the room 
> Now _you_ are saying and asserting "annoyed almost every
> person!"  Stop stating what you want me to have said, not
> what I actually said!  God, are purposely trying to _drive_
> the so-called "paranoia."

See, there you go again. It's someone else's fault. You're being
"driven" to paranoia. Here's a clue for you. You're already in paranoia-
land, my friend. Step 1 is realizing you're there. Step 2 is walking
away, taking a deep breath and not taking this so seriously. I was
obviously overreaching in my example. It was an example. A ficticious
example to point out that if there were a large number of people who
said almost the exact same thing about me at a certain point I would
realize it's me and that it's real. It's just common sense.

> > I wouldn't think they were jerks, out to get me, I would
> > wonder what I said or how I said what I said.
> Actually, I'm _not_ the one calling you guys "jerks" or
> otherwise.  I said I'm just tired of what I _see_ of "select
> people" do on-list that is _only_ directed towards me an
> _no_one_else_!  That's the reality, what you "select people"
> do!

I never said you used the exact word "jerks". I was, once again,
positing a hypothetical in which an individual annoys a bunch of people
and then thinks they're the problem.

> The hypocrisy is in the fact that you, among a handful of
> others, are psycho-analyzing me, and contributing to the
> "indirect paranoia" in the first place.  Stop and it will

Yes. We're forcing you to be paranoid, Bryan. I'm one of them now? I'm
to blame? Great.

> end.  Continue and you wonder why I want to prevent people
> from constantly attributing _everything_ to myself and myself
> only.

No. It will never end. Because eventually you will say something that
will grate on people and they will respond and then you will say that
we're ganging up on you and then eventually that we're making you
paranoid and then... rinse, repeat. It will never end until you chill

> I've had other, very illegal comments/deeds attributed to
> myself on other lists because there quickly becomes the
> default of "oh, that was Bryan Smith, he's always the
> troublemaker and capable of anything."

I have no idea what you're talking about, but once again, if it's
happened before, I might consider that it's not a coincidence.

> > Just some helpful advice.
> Bull, and you know it.  The hypocrisy of your agenda in this
> message and the prior message has _you_ putting things in
> more "absolutes" than anyone else!

No. I am trying to be helpful. I want you see you not piss off what you
call "the select few" on this list. And I want this list to be conducted
in a professional manner. I am trying to be helpful

> Again, re-read your comments on: 
> - "sporting your knowledge" 

That was me quoting you, Bryan.

> - "If I walked into a room and annoyed almost every person in
> the room"

That was a hypothetical. Trying to illustrate how I might react if
people reacted to me as they seemingly often react to you.

> You are _purposely_ trying to feed it right there!  And I'll
> I'm saying ... "Select people ... dudes!  Please stop!"  ;->

No, I'm not purposely trying to feed it. You're looking for things to
pick at.

> After that, I'm _still_ saying _only_ select people.  And I'm
> merely saying I'm "tired of the coincidences, even if they
> are not deliberate and subsonscience."
> But here's the deal.  It's clear that you do not like the
> fact that I only "temporarily" stop posting.  So I'll now
> make it permanent for the benefit of all you "select people"
> think it is for.

I don't care if you post or don't post. All I care is that this list not
be clogged by arguing about whether or not there is a cabal of "select
people" trying to "make you paranoid". It's ridiculous. Can't you see


More information about the CentOS mailing list