On Thu, 04 Jan 2007 01:21:14 -0800, Tim Smith wrote:
> In article <8y%mh.56468$qO4.4356@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> wjbell <wjbell@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>> > Dawn of the Microzealots
>> >
>> > ,----[ Quote ]
>> > | We "Real" Diggers had heard about groups offering a "service" to get
>> > | your Digg to the front page.
>> > | Why not? It makes perfect sense!
>> > |
>> > | We know Microsoft has a fucking MINT of money, and they have a Massive
>> > | 5 year investment in Vista, not mention all the DRM and proprietary
>> > | dominance that it?s success would firmly put in place.
>> > |
>> > | The biggest threat is the truth about Vista getting out.
>> > | I may not be able to find a smoking gun, or paper trail, but I know
>> > | when some if "fixing" an otherwise democratic process.
>> > `----
>> >
>> > http://www.phueque.com/wordpress/2007/01/02/dawn-of-the-microzealots/
>> >
>> > naio21. Have a look at the profile.
>> >
>> > For months the guy has been systematically modding hundreds of my comments
>> > because I occasionally criticise Microsoft. Then, all my comments were
>> > modded down by this user, regardless of the nature of the comments. He also
>> > personally attacked me, using vile language... many times in fact.
>>
>> Since when is your whining about users bothering you on another site [News]?
>>
>> I especially like this comment:
>>
>> > For months the guy has been systematically modding hundreds of my
>> > comments because I occasionally criticise Microsoft.
>>
>> Occasionally?!
>
> If you actually examine Digg, what you'll find is that some critical
> comments are voted down, and some are voted up. If you compare them,
> the thing that tends to be the determining factor is whether it is
> worthless or worthwhile criticism.
> For example, the blogger cited above (if I've correctly figured out his
> Digg user name), was voted down in one thread for a comment that started
> by calling someone else "a fucking liar" and "completely full of shit",
> and for another comment that talks about "The Vista sellouts in the
> RIAA/MPAA/Homeland Security/ and M$". Compare to comments that actually
> discuss the bad points of Vista DRM--many of those were voted up with
> scores in the 20's or 30's.
> There was also a comment from Roy in that Digg thread. It simply
> contained two quotes from off-topic articles, with links. It was voted
> down: -21.
That's because at digg they have figured Roy Schestowitz and his bullcrap
out.
Comp.os.linux.advocacy is a little slow in that area.
Like I've said before, if Roy Schestowitz pulled the crap he gets away
with in this group in other groups he would be run out of the place and
labeled a SPAMMER, which he is.
> Roy could learn something if he'd study the response to his own Digg
> comments. The ones where he just posts quotes and links that are weakly
> related, if at all, to the story, maybe get one or two votes up at best,
> and often go down. The few where he actually *contributes* something
> get many votes (for example, in the story on Gentoo for PS3, Roy posted
> a link to a forum thread with pictures, and left off the usual
> anti-Microsoft non-sequiturs that are in most of his posts...that got
> voted up +9).
Roy "could" be an asset to the Linux movement but he has to see beyond his
hate and paranoia and listen to his own constitution rather than letting
his overblown ego take over.
|
|
