non-disclosure of infrastructure problem a management issue?

[Tim]

Tim:
>> I still don't see why they couldn't have said that it would be *unsafe*
>> to install packages, without saying specifically why.  As opposed to

Rui Miguel Silva Seabra:
> You still don't see because you don't want to.

No, I didn't see because it didn't say.

I saw the original posting, and it was wide open to interpretation.  It
didn't spell out anything clearly.  It could well have meant that there
was a system failure, and if you started updating/installing you could
get stuck with a broken system.

At first glance, that's how it reads.  Only suspicion and paranoia leads
one to think it meant more than that.  We cannot read between the lines
and know what the message actually meant.  It's only by guessing at
things that we'd become alarmed about the message.  Whoever wrote that
did a very poor job of it.

-- 
[tim at localhost ~]$ uname -r
2.6.25.14-108.fc9.i686

Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored.  I
read messages from the public lists.