[TUHS] Re: Documents for UNIX Collections

[Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1632 bytes --]

Perhaps Al could offer those areas that segaloco could use to improve the
scans.

Let's get over the 'presentation' of the issue (which we all are thinking
in the back of our minds sucked) and understand how we call can produce
better scans without getting overly defensive or protective about it (both
reactions don't really help, and frankly aren't fun to read played out in a
public list).

Warner

On Tue, Aug 9, 2022 at 9:15 AM segaloco via TUHS <tuhs@tuhs.org> wrote:

> I'm literally the one doing it now.  Got a problem with it?  Tough, you're
> not the one doing *these* documents.  Literally nobody is asking you to
> take on the magnanimous task of "cleaning them up".  Do it yourself or step
> aside, but again, don't derail a thread about work I am going to do to lob
> criticism of work you aren't going to do.  Be childish somewhere else.
> Sorry Al is stinking up this thread, this is the last thing I wanted, I'm
> just contributing.
>
> - Matt G.
>
> ------- Original Message -------
> On Tuesday, August 9th, 2022 at 5:49 AM, Al Kossow <aek@bitsavers.org>
> wrote:
>
>
> > On 8/9/22 12:00 AM, segaloco wrote:
> >
> > > Frankly I will scan however I want given I am both paying for the
> documents myself and scanning them in my own free time.
> >
> >
> > Queue the virtue signaling.
> >
> > That is EXACTLY why I sent the rude message.
> > I spent days cleaning up your scans to meet the bitsavers scanning
> quality requirements of the
> > garbage you produced, because you spent a WHOLE DAY scanning them.
> >
> > I've been doing this for twenty years, don't talk to me about time or
> money spent doing this
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2161 bytes --]