>> >As far as fairness to the authors, I don't think the property rights
>> >go as far as to the name "listserver".
>> The name "ListServer" is in use by the MLM implemented by Tasos.
>> I sincerely hope you respect his use of that word.
>Now I'm *really* confused. We *use* Tasos' implementation. So, does
>that mean I have the right (and meet your standards of politeness) to
>use the name "listserver"??? If so, then I *must* use the address
>"listserv" as well. You see, we have a Unix host on the BITNET, and
>some BITNET sites have 8-character restrictions on addresses. Now
>what do you suggest?
Quite frankly, I suggest that we find something more meaningful to
discuss. We can all find naming clashes; look at the current flame-
war in cracking/phreaking circles over some 15-year-old's appropria-
tion of the name "Legion of Doom."
How many of us call our HP-UX systems "Unix"? How about those Macs
running A/UX? Are they "Unix"? PRIMIX? Solaris? HCX/UX? On and
on and on......*sigh*...........we could go on all summer long with
I've seen this particular flamewar crop up on BITNET lists (such as
LSTOWN-L and NODEINFO), Usenet newsgroups, and (most recently) here
All the world is not Eric Thomas' Revised LISTSERV, nor is it Tasos'
implementation. Gee, what if I run Majordomo and call it something
like "email@example.com"? What if I write an exact Unix clone
of LISTSERV? Arrgh.....