@gonzopancho:
I would invite you to fellate a dog, but I actually like dogs.
Is this the same ganzopancho = Jim Thompson / James Thompson, officer/director/manager of Electric Sheep Fencing, LLC (ESF)?
Surreal doesn't describe this particular remark, regardless of who it's directed at.
@phil.davis:
This sets a whole new stardard for ESF
I was actually offended by this language when I read it a few days ago. It is possible to have a disagreement and even argument on a forum without using language like that.
I hadn't thought of the "Report to moderator" button, should have done that straight away, but I have done that now, and stating that I am offended, which I am. Regardless of who the poster is, it is not acceptable to me. Maybe parts of these posts can be removed so that this sort of offensive language is not forever publicly visible on this otherwise friendly forum.
I have a feeling that there are other posts with offensive language - when I come across them again I will report those also.
I've only recently signed up for the forums due to an abundant willingness to dig further and provide some of the changes I've made to my own installation(s), so my 'post count' means little in terms of matters to this point. I must admit, after reading this section and the way "administration" [sic] has mishandled what is clearly becoming a marketing and management fiasco to just about anyone who reads an overview of the situation, I'm disturbed and appalled, and have rapidly grown distrustful of "leadership".
A difference in viewpoints, no matter how large, should never descend to such a level, even if the provocateur is as skilled as doktornotor. Does the "administration" have any idea how that looks when they're marketing their services, at least in part, as first-line support for the product? As a client, what kind of support could be expected from those with such patently horrible public manners?
No one is asking for my $0.02 as an relative new-comer, so I'm offering it without respect to the inquisition.
If administration wants to call it open source - let it be purely open source, flaws within the model and all - we all know it's not perfect, and we all know it rarely puts food on the table. Free is free. To date, it has served pfSense well it seems.
If administration wants to turn it into a commercial product - call it as much, and let simple economics have their way with it, along with the exceptionally-poor marketing strategy currently in place. At least someone knows what business model to which their efforts are being applied.
I personally have no problem with either as long as I know what I'm getting into, but the situation in which the project currently finds itself is exceptionally bad.
