Homer <usenet@xxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
> Verily I say unto thee, that Linonut spake thusly:
>> * Moshe Goldfarb. peremptorily fired off this memo:
>>> On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 00:47:56 +0100, Homer wrote:
>>>> [snip DooFy's belligerent frothing]
>>>>> Man, you got a warped groove.
>>>> It's hilarious how the Trolls keep accusing Roy of "lying" ...
>>>> because he posts somebody *else's* opinion/experience.
>>> The same could be said of your side of the debate Homer.......
> I don't recall ever suggesting that any Linux bug report was a lie. As
> for opinions, by virtue of their subjectivity they can neither be true
> nor false.
> My "side" of the argument has little to do with technical issues. Linux
> won the technical argument a long time ago, therefore there is little to
> discuss, beyond the admission that all software has bugs. This is wholly
> irrelevant; if I want to discuss bugs in Linux then I'll go to Bugzilla.
> I'm far more interested in the political ramifications of a company like
> Microsoft, operating like gangsters running a racketeering operation. If
> people want to discuss the disproportionately serious issues in Windows,
> compared to Linux, then that's fine by me too, but that doesn't mean I'm
> denying Linux has any bugs at all. It may well be that certain anecdotal
> "evidence" presented by Trolls like you are in fact lies. However, I am
> disinclined to contend that some repost of a Bugzilla report is a lie on
> the part of the messenger. But this is exactly what you and DooFuS /are/
> claiming about Roy. It's ridiculous and hypocritical, since you're lying
> about the source of what you contend is a lie, as a kind of filthy smear
> campaign against someone. Such thuggish tactics are quite representative
> of the gangsters you "evangelise" for, so your behaviour only serves to
> confirm my suspicions.
>> Both DFS and Roy hammer on a restricted (and thus biased) agenda.
>> Roy's topics, however, are much broader than DFS's monomaniacal
>> rantings. Plus, Roy is generally pleasant.
> Roy is also on the morally /right/ side of the argument. Indeed none of
> the Trolls have ever even attempted any justification for their morally
> untenable position, instead hiding behind arguments about money; market
> share and trivial bug reports, which they use as a bludgeon against us,
> whilst ignoring the political and fundamental technical arguments, such
> as Windows bloat; security and licensing issues, and Microsoft's filthy
> business practises.
To my mind, even the act of posting off-topic anti-charter material on a
consistent basis is enough to demonstrate the dishonesty of the trolls.
The actual /content/ of those anti-charter postings is, in reality, a
2nd order problem. The first crime, the first evidence of dishonesty,
is the initial posting.
The actual content is the next problem, and typically consists of one of
1. Openly anti-linux statements, ie., off-topic, anti-charter material,
either out of context, or unsupported in any way;
2. Open criticism of on-topic, pro-charter posters (shoot the messenger),
often libellous and probably illegal in several geographies;
3. Open criticism of on-topic, pro-charter posts, usually unsupported,
often intensely vitriolic.
Sadly, they so often get traction with these methods, that we end up
with threads almost entirely seeded from one of the above three methods,
whilst the initial crime, the initial posting, is ignored.
They are often further combined with other typically trolling techniques,
in particular, the x-posting of inflammatory material, the constant use
of nym-shifting (like Gary here, sn1t and others).
Incidentally, the other bizarre criticism has been a claim that Roy is
"spamming" the newsgroup by posting on-topic, pro-charter material.
>From time to time, I plead with everyone to ignore the trolls, and I say
so again. Please, do not give them a platform for their vitriolic
| mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
| Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
| Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
| Open platforms prevent vendor lock-in. Own your Own services! |