Roy Culley wrote:
> begin risky.vbs
> <1147617746.413038.74600@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> "Larry Qualig" <lqualig@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> > Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> >
> >> Yes, it keeps the group on topic. I remember what it was like some
> >> months ago. Other groups participants tend to agree.
> >
> > Looking at some of the recent "News" threads you've started it seems
> > that the "on topic" you're talking about has nothing to do with
> > Linux, but everything to do with a everything anti-Microsoft
> > sentiment.
> >
> > [News] Architectural Windows Flaws
> > [News] Microsoft Set to Stone Self
> > [News] Vista Bugs Bounty Hunt Begins
> > [News] Microsoft Said to Have Bribed GoDaddy
> > [News] Microsoft Earns Money from Bad Server Patch
>
> When I first subscribed to COLA I used to often add [OT] to anti-MS
> articles I posted. The FUD and lies spread not only by trolls but MS
> themselves (OSS anti-American, GPL a virus, etc) convinced me that
> anti-MS posts are most certainly appropriate and within the charter
> for COLA.
I understand *why* this happens. What I don't understand is why for
some people this seems to be *all* they do.
> > The term "news" would be more accurate if it was truly news and less
> > opinions. (Hint: Linking to a blog entry where someone whines
> > against Microsoft is *not* news.) In many cases the titles of these
> > threads is anything but accurate.
>
> The [News] subject tag was added by Roy when another poster said he
> didn't want to see these posts but wanted to see other posts made by
> Roy. The majority of the threads started by Roy are News. Of course he
> can change the tag to anything he wants but there'll allways be
> someone who objects. Your criticism is extremely petty.
Links to real news stories are fine and I have no personal objection
with that. But when the topic is posted as being [News] and the link
goes to some guys blog entry on a message board then this is *not* news
IMO and doesn't deserve to be labled as such.
|
|
