Well so where /media should have be placed ?
I mean when they say "a consistent", isn't UNIX consistent enough ?

I had never seen those README files, and do not find them on my systems.

A separation: /mnt for root(sysadm) mounted filesystems and other block devices, /media for user-space tools and applications to mount, well, media: that makes perfect sense. I can get behind that idea. Alas, most systems I have seen do not lend themselves to that, nor is it clear what tools and applications apply. As a concept though, it makes better sense than: "well lets use /mnt on this distribution and /media on that one"!

Hi,
Gnu/Linux is not UNIX! Some Gnu/Linux are considered UNIX-like.

As admin you can set the system up as you see fit. Gnu/Linux has so many variants and do have elementary differences. Basic layout is somewhat the same. Management is not always handled the same between Gnu/Linux. Sure we have FHS, the kernel and unique styles to handle the layout of the system.

Still some Gnu/Linux users have the benefit to set things in a way they desire.

I wouldn't call them idiots, but it is also curious to me why it's not under /mnt.

My guess is that there may have been some interactions with automounter...

(The separation of user space vs system space doesn't really pan out, as users homes could be under /mnt.)

It is not under /mnt to help control user permissions.

The things that are under normal /mnt are not the same type of things that are under /media.

They should be different. It is correct as it is.

Ok, but where should it have been placed ? I mean, in a intelligent way, not in / .

What have user permissions got to do with it?
Everything is under "/" and there's no problem with perms there.
"/mnt" is root:root:755, which looks fine to me.

One example that keeping /mnt and /media separate can be just practical. Rescue live CDs (RIP Linux, 4MLinux...) mount all HDDs under /mnt while removable disks under /media. This is to make it easer for user to backup data, e.g. when you open Midnight Commander you have all HDDs (data to backup) in one panel while removable target disks in the other. Also the assumption that this is admin who uses liveCD for maintenance seems to be rather obvious, so there is full root's access to all disks/media by default. This is a logical solution for rescue live CDs, but the same solution can be not optimal for desktop distribution. I want to say that it is up to developer/sysadmin to decide what kind of functionality (s)he wants to have.

never bothered me... it was annoyance at first... but now it does not bother me.