[9fans] 9fans content

[Charles Forsyth <forsyth@terzarima.net>]

> didn't want the patches themselves posted to 9fans either *sigh*)
> 
> Which reminds me, a plan9-tech list has been created because some gsoc
> participants didn't feel like having technical discussions in 9fans,
> which this days
> seems to be rather full of offtopic banter and other noise.

i'm not sure i follow this.  you complain that 9fans is `full of offtopic banter and other noise'
(mainly because people aren't contributing technical content) so apparently the best way
to deal with that is not indeed to contribute technical content, but to move that discussion
elsewhere; even so, it's also a fault that it hasn't got more noise in the form of tedious patch diffs to wade through
(or perhaps you meant just list of patches as they are applied, which some might well find helpful).

(i think there is a remark about this sort of thing in the Preface to the 1662 revision
of the Book of Common Prayer.)