IRC.

1 files changed, 33 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/news/2011-q2-ps.mdwn b/news/2011-q2-ps.mdwn
index cbf039b0..14578e83 100644
--- a/news/2011-q2-ps.mdwn
+++ b/news/2011-q2-ps.mdwn
@@ -95,4 +95,37 @@ slashdot
 and phoronix did some [performance tests of the Hurd][phorperf], 
 [phorperf]: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=debian_gnu_hurd&num=1
 
+---
+
+IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2011-08-24:
+
+    < ArneBab> hurd related: I now think you were right, antrik: the hurd
+      rumors don’t belong into the news (tschwinge)
+    < antrik> ArneBab: you mean the postscriptum as a whole, or just the wild
+      rumours part?...
+    < ArneBab> the whole PS
+    < ArneBab> it should rather go into a blog post
+    < ArneBab> (in the wiki)
+    < antrik> hm... I don't think I agree
+    < ArneBab> why?
+    < antrik> apparently there is a number of people following the news now,
+      and apparently many of them misread some statements... it makes sense to
+      use the same channel for clarifying them I'd say
+    < ArneBab> hm, ok
+    < ArneBab> how would you select the part to include?
+    < antrik> roughly speaking, I'd include everything that actually relates to
+      the previous news that were misunderstood
+    < antrik> and drop all unrelated speculations that popped up
+    < antrik> BTW, it *might* be useful perhaps to actually update the original
+      news posting with the clarifications?...
+    < ArneBab> we can’t do that without breaking some peoples RSS feeds
+    < antrik> note that there is another aspect to consider: the fact that
+      several news sites picked it up is indeed genuine news by itself...
+    < ArneBab> that’s right, yes
+    < antrik> will it really break anything? from what I heard so far it just
+      means they will see the posting as new again, which would actually make
+      sense in this case...
+    < antrik> but I don't insist if you think it's too risky :-)
+    < antrik> just an idea
+
 -->