flatfish+++ wrote:
> On Wed, 03 Jan 2007 06:47:01 -0800, Larry Qualig wrote:
>
> >
> > High Plains Thumper wrote:
> >> Tim Smith wrote:
> >>
> >> > Still looking for all the FUD Roy says rodtrent is
> >> > submitting to Digg. Here are his latest submissions:
> >>
> >> <gobshite snipped>
> >>
> >> Why are you so concerned about what he posts outside this
> >> newsgroup?
> >>
> >> Pssst, did you ever read,
> >>
> >> http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/
> >>
> >> | The charter of comp.os.linux.advocacy is: For discussion of
> >> | the benefits of Linux compared to other operating systems.
> >>
> >
> >> What does discussing Roy's outside activities have to do with
> >> advocating Linux?
> >
> > You should ask Roy since he was the one who started this when he posted
> > the: "Microsoft Spreads FUD in Digg.com, Using its MVP's" thread.
> >
> > http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/browse_frm/thread/ab5d29de8a28d6f0/3219d01fbfabf3b0?lnk=gst&q=microsoft+spread+fud+in+digg.com&rnum=1&hl=en#3219d01fbfabf3b0
> >
> > Turns out that this was yet another lie from Roy Schestowitz because
> > the facts prove that the MVP named by Roy posts very little about
> > Microsoft.
> >
> > The next lie from Roy Schestowitz was to check out his comments because
> > his comments are somehow pro-Microsoft FUD. Once again, the facts prove
> > that Roy Schestowitz was lying again.
> >
> > So Roy made several claims that this MVP is spreading FUD on Digg.com
> > and has yet to show a single example to back up his claim. The a sane
> > individual, it would appear that it is Roy Schestowitz who is spreading
> > FUD by falsely blaming this guy for something he clearly didn't do.
> >
> >
> >> Get a clue, will yah.
> > Likewise. Or do you wish to backup Roys lies?
>
>
> I notice a few of Roy's shills are attempting to back up Roy Schetotwitz
> in another thread.
> It is failing miserably though.
It's also interesting to see how many of the Linux advocates have
slowly been separating themselves from Roy lately.
When he first started spamming this group everyone was all for it. Then
some grew tired of it. Then more and more started mentioning how it's
easy to filter. Eventually it reached the point where several have
openly asked that he start doing some "filtering" of his own and post
more on-topic posts.
Then there's the whole issue of Roy Schestowitz being dishonest.
Initially the other Linux advocates simply ignored the lies and looked
the other way. Then a few started posting how he should be "more
truthful" with his subject lines. Now it's at the point where it's rare
to see anyone (other than Mark Kent of course) defending Roy anymore.
And as you mention, when they do try it's usually short-lived because
it must be damn hard to defend an outright liar. So as it's been
pointed out elsewhere, the tactic is usually to turn the argument into
something else. See the "Why developers hate MS and IE" thread/lie that
Roy started. It was pointed out that nowhere does it mention that
developers hate MS or IE and that the article even shows that Firefox
has the same problems with the Acid 2 compiance test. Knowing that it's
impossible to defends Roy's lies, they start attacking the person who
pointed this out.
|
|
