Then re-read my comment within the context of this discussion, which is OpenBSD being on the verge of bankruptcy.
If I believed all the BSD forks had a chance to live long and prosper on their own I wouldn't be saying that, but right now it seems to me that none of them have any real long time chance to remain generic OS on par with Linux (except possibly FreeBSD but it's not even certain anymore). Linux just moves too fast these days.
Your comment doesn't make more sense from reading it more often. Saying "because I don't understand how the BSDs work or their development processes, I think they should stop existing to prevent them from having to stop existing" is still nonsensical, no matter how you slice it.
It's nonsensical because you misunderstand it. He is saying he thinks two or more of them ought to combine efforts in order to prevent all of them from failing.
Two of them "combining efforts" is removing one. That is no different than one of them "failing". That is the point. Contrary to armchair OS designer belief, you can't just say "hey guys, stop working on your project and go work on someone else's because I don't know what I am talking about and think this will somehow help something". Go tell linus to start working on mercurial because you think he should. What is the result of that conversation going to be?
If I believed all the BSD forks had a chance to live long and prosper on their own I wouldn't be saying that, but right now it seems to me that none of them have any real long time chance to remain generic OS on par with Linux (except possibly FreeBSD but it's not even certain anymore). Linux just moves too fast these days.