__/ [ Kier ] on Wednesday 24 January 2007 17:15 \__
> On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 16:58:15 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>
>> __/ [ Kier ] on Wednesday 24 January 2007 15:49 \__
>>
>>> On Tue, 23 Jan 2007 22:25:40 -0500, flatfish+++ wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 01:32:36 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> __/ [ The Ghost In The Machine ] on Wednesday 24 January 2007 00:33 \__
>>>>>
>>>>>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, VistaKing
>>>>>> <BushIsATraitor@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>> wrote
>>>>>> on Tue, 23 Jan 2007 19:19:30 -0500
>>>>>> <3yxth.2353$WL2.1713@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <schestowitz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote
>>>>>>>> The next generation will run Linux.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ya, Linux is always one generation away. It will be ready any day
>>>>>>> now.
>>>>>>> Next month. Next year. Next never.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Linux = Shit Stick.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is Vista ready?
>>>>>
>>>>> Ghost. Please don't feed him. You fed him a lot the last time he was
>>>>> here (before the ushering for Vista become more necessary than ever)
>>>>> and it makes plonking less than constructive, despite it destructive
>>>>> nature.
>>>>
>>>> Fear noted.......
>>>
>>> What 'fear'? Disgust, more like. Or do you enjoy reading Linux = Shit
>>> Stick?
>>
>> He's a sick man. No need to feed him, either. I spoke to Mark on the phone
>> this morning and it appears evident that Gary has been paid (directly or
>> indirectly) for quite some time. Feeding him is just a way of justifying
>> the need for his job at/for Microsoft.
>
> What proof does he have of that? I've never believed it, of flatfish or
> even Erik. And most certainly not of Tim. We don't get paid, why should
> they? Why shouldn't Erik believe what he says, when someone like Rex or 7,
> who both post fairly obvious nonsense, beleive what *they* post?
We have some disagreements here, but we can probably cope with this. What Rex
says is largely true and accurate (with careful attention to details). The
trolls' personal assassination compaign has certainly led you to lose trust
in him. The systematic and repetitive nitpicking proves to have been
effective.
As for the former part, not all of them get paid. Some of them do. When I say
"paid" I don't mean "get sent a cheque". But they are selling something.
Some get "compensated" for their time. People other than myself have spotted
marketeers who spend their time in Netscape and Digg as well. When people
like Will Wheaton (now a colleague of mine) talk about stalkers and SEO
marketeers that set up networks and relationships for profit, then that
ought to have some credence, not just concrete proof. The Web becomes the
new marketing ground and there are few (if any) limits. It's one of these
"he did it, I just retaliated" routine of 5 year olds. Microsoft tells
Jelliffe (?) that fanboys corrupt Open XML in blogs (or Wikis), so it takes
that as a valid excuse to play hardball.
Microsoft's involvement in Wikipedia (the most recent story) is just the tip
of the iceberg. Also bear in mind that most people who have edited Wikipedia
on their behalf offered no disclosure. This was not the first such incident;
it was only the first one that got _reported_ (in Wikipedia, that is).
--
~~ Best wishes
Roy S. Schestowitz | if ("if"=inv("fi")) print("foo/bar")
http://Schestowitz.com | RHAT GNU/Linux ¦ PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
run-level 5 Jan 23 00:41 last=S
http://iuron.com - help build a non-profit search engine
|
|
