DragonFly docs List (threaded) for 2004-11
Re: not bad article, in my opinion
> "Sascha Wildner" <saw@xxxxxxxxx> schreef:
>> Matthew Dillon wrote:
>>> Makes me a wiki believer, it's a better organized description than
>>> any that I could put together on my own.
>> If you find any errors, feel free to edit. :)
> Really good article indeed.. any ideas who wrote this? Perhaps the link to
> wikipedia should be on the website (in the FAQ for example)...?
"Jeremy Almey" <jere_almey@xxxxxxxxxxx> talked to me about the original
Wikipedia version of this back in April; that's the first record I have of
it. You can see the Wikipedia article history here:
This wordiq.com version appears to be a cheap moneymaker - it's a rip of
the Wikipedia content (check the bottom of the wordiq.com page) with ads
placed on it so that it generates revenue. Probably not a huge amount of
money coming it, but it's not like the content cost anything.
If we link to/use/modify anything, it should be the Wikipedia page: