Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: Why the criticism of Roy's [News] articles?

  • Subject: Re: Why the criticism of Roy's [News] articles?
  • From: Snit <SNIT@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 07:43:07 -0700
  • Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
  • Organization: SunSITE.dk - Supporting Open source
  • References: <brikr3-nl.ln1@dog.did.it> <1156032729_26657@sp6iad.superfeed.net> <kalor3-oq2.ln1@ellandroad.demon.co.uk>
  • Thread-index: AcbFMB11XDyxhjEjEduMnQADk7CB0g==
  • Thread-topic: Why the criticism of Roy's [News] articles?
  • User-agent: Microsoft-Entourage/11.2.1.051004
  • Xref: news.mcc.ac.uk comp.os.linux.advocacy:1142986
"Mark Kent" <mark.kent@xxxxxxxxxxx> stated in post
kalor3-oq2.ln1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on 8/21/06 5:25 AM:

> begin  oe_protect.scr
> Donn Miller <hackr_d@xxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>> Roy Culley wrote:
>>> Roy Schestowitz's [News] posts have really rattled the COLA wintrolls.
>>> The personal attacks against him have proved that.
>>> 
>>> One argument used by some of the trolls is that so few of his posts
>>> generate followups and hence nobody appreciates his articles to COLA.
>> 
>> I think the fact that so few of his posts generate followups is a good
>> argument for grouping a number of his posts into one post.  I don't mean
>> create one giant post containing 200 posts, but rather, do something
>> like is done with FAQs: break the posts down into 3-4 or so posts.
>> 
> 
> I totally disagree.  I prefer to have separate titles which are relevant
> to each posting.  As his postings are on topic, are well within the
> charter, and are relevant, and are easy to mark down if you don't like
> them, there's no reason to impose restrictions - think about this a
> minute - why would you want to restrict /on topic posting/, yet leave
> the xtian fundies, snits, yttrxes and so on alone?  It maketh no sense
> to me.
> 
> Roy S - please do /not/ combine news postings.

Why would you group such disparate folks as you do, or were you just
trolling to get my attention?

Let me guess: you will *claim* I am like a Chistian fundy but never support
your claim with a single word I have ever written.  I do hope you prove me
wrong and are more reasonable than *that*!

-- 
? If A = B then B = A (known as the "symmetric property of equality")
? Incest and sex are not identical (only a pervert would disagree)
? One can be actually guilty of a crime but neither tried nor convicted





[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index