On Feb 11, 1:37 pm, "Ian Semmel"
<anyoneNOJ...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> When you download the new headers, all you get is a screen full of crap from
> Schestowitz. Anything that might be interesting I have already read from the
> TechRepublic and ZDNet newsletters I subscribe to and Schestowitz
> plagiarises from. Sometimes there are a few contributions from others but
> they are hidden in the garbage.
Shestowitz provides a number of good leads to events related to Linux,
which is the primary topic of the group, and some good articles
related to Microsoft Windows, which is the biggest competitor to
Linux.
He is very careful not to pull too much information, but instead
provides just enouh information to encourage interested readers to
follow the links.
In this group, readers are encouraged to give their feedback. Since
this is an open BBS, all information can be posted with no censorship
so long as copyrights and NDAs are not violated.
Prior to Roy Schestowitz, most of the headlines were initiated by
trolls who would post observations, often absurd ones, that would end
up degenerating into bunch of really great pro-linux articles, with
headlines of "Linux Sux - Windows rulz".
> It is a shame that one lunatic can hijack a newsgroup like this.
To Wintrolls he's a Lunatic, because he provides positive coverage
and positive headlines related to the topic of discussion.
To Linux Advocates, he's a delightful source of interesting topics for
discussion, providing all of the information required to be informed
about the topic, without having to resort to total copyright
violation.
If you have some really great topics you would like to discuss, that
are relevant to this group, you could post your own "1 paragraph plus
link"
> In Australia, there is a crime on the books such that someone
> can be locked up for being declared a "serial pest" by the courts.
We have a similar law in the United States. However, we also have a
law and court ruling that says that anyone can post pretty much
anything they want to a discussion group, so long as none of the
responses to that post are deleted. The one valid exception is cases
of flagrant copyright violation or nondisclosure violation.
For example, if I were to post sealed court records to this usenet
group, which I obtained illegally, then the article could be deleted
by administrators. If I were to post the source code to Windows
Vista, then these could be deleted by the admins.
On the other hand, unless the posting involves a direct criminal act,
or presents a clear and present danger to others (such as posting the
time and place where a bomb should be detonated), the administrator is
not allowed to "censor" the group.
> We need a cyber version of this law to get rid of idiots like Schestowitz.
Actually, the laws are very clear and very carefully argued.
What Schestowitz is doing is not only allowed, it's actually protected
by law.
On the other hand, you are completely free to dispute his
observations, and since many of his citations are from blogs, many of
them are very much open to dispute.
Enjoy the show, or even better, join the clowns.
Rex Ballard
Linux Advocate since 1993
Open Source Advocate since 1983
|
|
