On Sat, 15 Jul 2006 19:38:52 -0400, flatfish+++ wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Jul 2006 16:25:14 -0700, T.G.Reaper wrote:
>
>>
>> Why can't Linux advocates be honest and just admit what is so
>> obviously and clearly true: this claim that "it's
>> difficult/impractical to use Windows XP without admin rights" it
>> totally bogus, false, and unsupportable?
>
> Key words: "Linux Advocates" and Honest....used in the same sentence.
And you are honest? Please don't make me laugh. You should look at
yourself before condemning others for the faults you regularly display.
> Even the honest ones, (that's not you Roy Shysterwitch) won't step up to
> the plate and break ranks.
> Take a look at the crap Ballard spews.
Why? I don't read most of what Rex posts, he's too long-winded for one,
and batty for another.
>
> Jedi?
> Yet another weirdo who seems to think he knows something about digital
> audio despite getting trounced every time he makes the mistake of
> x-posting to rec.audio.pro.
>
> Any Linux advocates challenge these people?
> How about "7" ?
> Another oddball who seems to be an expert in misspelling words.
> Roy Culley?
> Twisted stats, yet how many Linux advocates complain about him
> interjecting his own (99.99 percent wrong) opinions into what he posts as
> *real and accurate stats*.
Opinions are not 'wrong' or 'right', they're *opinions*, you fool.
> Any Linux advocate complaining about him?
> He, along with Ballard, 7 and Shysterwitch are in effect making the rest
> of the good advocates look like idiots, but they still will not break
> ranks.
Plonked, plonked, and his name is not 'Shysterwitch, you slimy arsehole.
> They just go around with blinders on thinking all is well, when it is not.
>
> Nahh...most of the so called Linux advocates in this group have some
> serious social issues.
Speak for yourself, flatfish, you certainly don't speak for any one else.
--
Kier
|
|
