Beef:  Slang.       a complaint.
     an argument or dispute.

https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.dictionary.com_browse_beef&d=DwIDaQ&c=gRgGjJ3BkIsb5y6s49QqsA&r=gd8BzeSQcySVxr0gDWSEbN-P-pgDXkdyCtaMqdCgPPdW1cyL5RIpaIYrCn8C5x2A&m=udqqjMTgzCb4e7B4bSZsQSucKrJdBsUWfh-ZCVVf41k&s=Mx2aCWnuP6ZizsericAqpby4d9Jgaj5RSZycrHVivqo&e= 

as I could not find a definition of "beef" in Merriam-Webster on-line.

The only reason that I am posting a "definition" of the term you used is 
so that I can address your accusation.

I do not have a complaint, argument, or dispute with Rocky EL or any 
other distro, enthusiast, "enterprise", or supported for fee.  The 
issues are suitability, currency, hardening, and support mechanisms.  I 
can elaborate on any of these if there is interest.  It is difficult, 
but not impossible, to have a distro that does not have computer science 
and engineering professionals (not in the sense of necessarily using 
this as in the sense of a significant source of gainful employment, nor 
in the sense of formal academic diplomata -- Heaviside had no such 
diplomata, but in the sense of knowledge, understanding, and skills, of 
which Heaviside had sufficient in all three of these areas) doing the 
implementation that is suitable for "hardened" production use, including 
converting a distribution source into a functioning alternately badged 
but otherwise identical "executable" distribution.

My observation about the paywall was simply that public archived 
discussions are needed to trace back both proper attribution (even if 
not for-fee property) as well as to verify the current state of any 
particular implementation.  (I am not going debate how one terms a 
practice -- if access requires a fee or the equivalent -- make a 
contribution of any sort-- such fee-controlled access has the same 
effect as a paywall -- do not supply the fee, no access.)

A discussion of the actual or to-be-implemented suitability, currency, 
hardening, and support mechanisms of any distro (or other engineering 
artifact for that matter) is not a complaint, but simply proper 
engineering.  Actual binary executables are constructed through 
engineering and technology.

On 12/30/20 8:08 AM, Jon Pruente wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 29, 2020 at 6:51 PM Yasha Karant <[log in to unmask] 
> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
> 
> 
>     Thus, unlike either the Ubuntu (including LTS) Ask Ubuntu or this SL
>     list that are available without any fee with full archive access, it
>     appears that to get to the RockyEL "list" much older than one calendar
>     week, one must subscribe for a fee.  Such a system makes archival
>     information not generally available.  If other RockyEL (e.g., #rocky )
>     readers do not see the paywall message and are not paying a fee (or
>     have
>     an institutional "subscription"), please comment as to how to get the
>     "archives".
> 
> 
> It's not a paywall for users. It's a limit of using a free Slack 
> instance vs paid. The Rocky Linux team is already in the process of 
> moving to a longer term system. The slack was never meant to be 
> permanent, as it was initially used for gmk's HPC company. It was the 
> easiest and most expedient place to send people at the sudden change 
> from Red Hat. You seem to have quite a beef against Rocky in principle, 
> and choose to ignore that the project is literally brand new and was 
> started without any advance plans.