On Sun, 08 Apr 2007 16:15:31 +0200, Hadron Quark wrote:
> Kier <vallon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> On Sun, 08 Apr 2007 15:46:19 +0200, Hadron Quark wrote:
>>
>>> Kier <vallon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, 08 Apr 2007 14:22:44 +0200, Hadron Quark wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Kier <vallon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, 08 Apr 2007 11:56:14 +0100, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> __/ [ Kier ] on Sunday 08 April 2007 10:47 \__
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sun, 08 Apr 2007 04:59:39 +0100, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I didn't read the whole article, but I looked at the headline and the
>>>>>>>>> closing paragraphs. Erik is nitpicking here, but I'll admit I was
>>>>>>>>> unintentionally inaccurate. Lying is /deliberate/. What happened here was
>>>>>>>>> /accidental/. And it happens in every news site every now and then, even
>>>>>>>>> in Groklaw.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You should start reading the articlkes more, then. Far better to be
>>>>>>>> scrupulous, and post fewer articles that you *know* you can stand by, than
>>>>>>>> go for volume and be caught out like this. remember, the folk in the
>>>>>>>> 'Opposition' are not always wrong, and 'our' side is not always right.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The more careful and scrupulous you are, the less ammunition your critics
>>>>>>>> have.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks, Kier, for the advice. I do try to read the articles carefully and
>>>>>>> sometimes in full (PJ does this as well before posting anything), but it
>>>>>>> does not guarantee that the article is accurate (Linux.com corrected
>>>>>>> BoycottNovell.com in the past because a major publication had a mistake that
>>>>>>> led to a 'broken telephone' effect). Sometimes you are held responsible for
>>>>>>> someone else's mistake as there's no peer review.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's true. But I think it's fair to say not all of your inaccuracies can
>>>>>> be put down to someone else's carelessness. You must always strive to be
>>>>>> as factual and above-board as possible. Of course, mistakes will always be
>>>>>> made, we're only human. Just do your best to avoid them
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You can never avoid accidents altgother, but you can reduce their frequency.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Agreed. That's why I suggested that perhaps you post less material, so you
>>>>>> have time to be certain of its veracity. Or maybe it's time for a new
>>>>>> approach altogether. There are so many important issues in Linux-land that
>>>>>> just don't seem to be getting discussed here.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Here's one idea, just off the top of my head. How about something like:
>>>>>> 'Important Topic of the Day'? An example might be, 'Is the GPLv3 an
>>>>>> improvement over v2 What are the likely implications for the future?'.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm sure there are lots of subjects out there just waiting to be
>>>>>> discussed. Why not give it some thought?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>
>>>>> Because the Roybot is interested in getting his name in lights. Quantity
>>>>
>>>> First, never forget the person at the other end of the line is as human as
>>>> you. He's not 'the Roybot'. Second, unless you can read his mind, you
>>>> really don't know *what* his motive is. But of course, you assume the
>>>> worst one.
>>>
>>> Kier - don't be so prissy. One can glean information form the facts at
>>> hand. And the Roybot constantly lies and misrepresents. He has an
>>> agenda. And that agenda is to reflect badly on MS and proprietary SW
>>> regardless how inaccurate pr vile his slander is-
>>
>> Again, calling him 'the Roybot' does nothing to help the situation. And
>> exactly what 'facts' are you talking about? He posts a lot, in lots of
>> forums, etc. Big deal. That's presumably because he's interested in that
>> kind of thing. Evidently, he's pasionate about Linux and FOSS in general.
>> Wish I had a tenth of that much energy and enthusiasm for anything these
>> days. That enthusiasm may have led him too often into folly, but that's
>> what kids are like.
>
> And yet YOU are telling him off for getting things wrong too. You are
> telling him how to post. I think you should look into a mirror before
> you start lecturing others on "superiority".
The difference is, I'm trying to help him get things right. All you're
interested in is sliging insults.
>
> The Roybot has his own agenda. And its not to simply advocate Linux.
>
> This is too boring.
>
> *snip*
Please yourself. Doesn't bother me if you're too arrogant to bother with
anything constructive.
--
Kier
|
|
