Kier wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Sep 2006 11:52:41 -0700, Larry Qualig wrote:
>
> >
> > Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> >> __/ [ Larry Qualig ] on Thursday 21 September 2006 15:57 \__
> >>
> >> > Novell (NASDAQ: NOVL - News) is not keeping up with its paperwork, and
> >> > it is causing headaches. Novell said Wednesday afternoon, it has now
> >> > received a staff determination from Nasdaq that the company is subject
> >> > to delisting.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > http://biz.yahoo.com/seekingalpha/060921/17309_id.html?.v=1
> >> >
> >> > More proof that the company is both collapsing and imploding
> >> > simultaneously. It's not surprising that former VP's (like Joseph
> >> > Forgione) and the company CEO (Jack Messner) and many others have fled
> >> > the sinking ship.
> >>
> >
> >> Is this comp.os.linux.advocacy or is it microsoft.shameless.fud?
> >
> > I did not mention Microsoft one single time. My post was strictly NEWS
> > (it appears in several financial publications and web-sites) and was
> > strictly about Novell.
> >
> > If anyone here talks about Microsoft it is you. If you spent half as
> > much time talking about Linux as you do about Microsoft, Vista, Zune
> > and the XBox you could actually advocate something.
> >
> > Why is it okay for you to post twisted news stories and f-a-r stretches
> > of half-truths when it comes to anything even remotely related to MS
> > but if someone posts a less-than-flattering REAL NEWS STORY about
> > Novell it is somehow FUD?
> >
> > Fact is that Fud-is-Fud and it's blatantly obvious that you have no
> > issues with FUD as long as it's -->you<-- who is spreading it.
>
> You used to be a decent type, Larry. Now you're behaving like a troll. Why?
Hi Kier,
Sorry you feel this way but I don't beleive that I'm trolling. Facts
can be unpopular at times but I really do try to be factually correct
with my posts. I do enjoy a good intellectually honest
discussion/debate but I hate liars. Don't answer here if you don't want
but ask yourself this question. Would you say that Roy's posts here are
fair, truthful and intellectually honest? Or are they severely slanted
and intentionally distorted in order to make Microsoft look bad at
every possible opportunity?
So let's examine my "trolling post"... it's a new day and I'm curious
what I was thinking yesterday when I wrote this.
> > I did not mention Microsoft one single time. My post was strictly NEWS
> > (it appears in several financial publications and web-sites) and was
> > strictly about Novell.
Still correct. I didn't mention MS at all in my post. How much would
you like to bet that if it was MSFT that received a Nasdaq Delisting
Notice that Roy would have jumped on that news story immediately and
posted one or more links here? I'm sure comments would include how
it's now over for the company.
But NOVL getting a delisting notice is much more relevant to Linux than
if MSFT were to get one. Yet the NOVL story never got posted but you
can be sure that the MSFT story would be posted here if that were ever
the case.
> > If anyone here talks about Microsoft it is you. If you spent half as
> > much time talking about Linux as you do about Microsoft, Vista, Zune
> > and the XBox you could actually advocate something.
I just did a Google search and looked at the last 20 or so posts that
Roy made. He mentions/references/talks-about Microsoft is mentioned
more often than Linux. Surely you've seen the dozens of posts about
Zune (iPod-like) player, XBox360 and basically everything and anything
else to do with MSFT posted here by Roy.
So yes... I do think he would be a more effective advocate for Linux if
he actually stayed on-topic and actually talked about the OS that he is
supposedly advocating instead of whining about MSFT all of the time.
> > Why is it okay for you to post twisted news stories and f-a-r stretches
> > of half-truths when it comes to anything even remotely related to MS
> > but if someone posts a less-than-flattering REAL NEWS STORY about
> > Novell it is somehow FUD?
This is pretty much self-explanatory.
> > Fact is that Fud-is-Fud and it's blatantly obvious that you have no
> > issues with FUD as long as it's -->you<-- who is spreading it.
This goes back to my original point. Can anyone here honestly say that
Roy's posts are fair, truthful and accurate or are they worded (and
thread titles intentionally altered) in order to portray MSFT in the
worst possible way? IMO Fud is Fud and lies are lies no matter who
tells them.
|
|
