On Sun, 31 Dec 2006 10:58:54 -0500, mlw wrote:
> My my my how the "new breed" of COLA residents suck.
>
> about 8 to 10 years ago, COLA was kind of fun. We had the trolls, but even
> the trolls had something to offer. The Linux supporters discussed Linux,
Hey, some of us still do :-)
> pros, cons, attributes, failures, and swapped advice on how to accomplish
> something, or rarely, lament something that couldn't yet be done on Linux.
>
> There are still some old-timers on this group who remember. It was fun. It
> was informative. Now what is it?
>
> (1) It is spammed regularly with news articles.
Can be plonked, if desired, though - at least he had the courtesy to make
that easy for anyone who wishes to do so. I'd like to see Roy be more
discriminating in his choices of article, and less misleading in his
subject lines, but in principle, what he's doing is certainly advocacy. It
just may not be the best *kind* of advocacy.
>
> (2) It allows no honest discussion, dare say you have problems with Linux,
> and you are labeled a troll and dismissed regardless of actual content of
> your statement.
True to some extent, I'm sorry to have to say. I'd certainly like to see
more positive Linux advocacy and much less anti-MS posting. It's
impossible to exclude Windows entirely from the conversation, obviously,
but the emphasis should always be on Linux strong points rather than
Windows weak points.
Problems with Linux shouldn't be exaggerated, but neither should they be
dismissed - faults can only be eradicated if they are admitted to exist
first, after all.
>
> (3) The wintrolls are starting to sound more reasonable than the supposed
> Linux supporters.
Not too often, though. The point is more that some posters are called
windtrolls when in fact they aren't. It's easy to apply labels. And
posters are too often judged by their reputations rather than what they
have actually written.
>
> (4) The whole notion of discussion with facts is gone. It is almost
> impossible to make a post without someone ignoring the technical context of
> the discussion and starting a flame war of opinion.
They're alike arseholes - everyone's got 'em ;-) The group is mostly
opinion against opinion, IMO. Probably always was, when you came down to
it. Computing is so broad a subject that no one person can really claim to
know it all. Most people are sincerely convinced *they* know what the
'facts' are, and everyone else is wrong, but how can we ever prove it
conclusively?
>
>
> How many of you supposed "Linux supporters" can say this:
>
> I have a couple GPL projects available to the general public.
> I have contributed money and time to open source projects like PHP,
> PostgreSQL, and others.
> I have set up multiple web systems (racks at a colo) for clients, on the
> order of 10 (usually many more) computers per system, with load balancing,
> web services, databases, etc. all using open source.
> I have worked on open source software for a number of billion dollar
> companies.
> I have been using Linux, almost exclusively, since 1995/1996
> In the last 10 years, I have made my living almost exclusively working on
> Linux and FreeBSD. (Some windows and mac as needed)
Well, I certainly can't. I'm a user, no more, no less. I've never
programmed anything, and the likelihood is I never will. My talents, such
as they are, don't lie in the kinds of areas that can be put to use in
OSS. All I can do is continue to use Linux, and to advocate it when and
where I can - in the real world as well as here in COLA.
>
> So, if you are thinking of labeling me a "wintroll," you are, of course,
> free to hold any opinion you like, but you would be a fool.
You're hardly what I'd call a wintroll. You'd need to be an ardent Windows
user for that, which you clearly aren't.
--
Kier
|
|