On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 17:11:42 +0100, Hadron wrote:
> Moshe Goldfarb <brick.n.straw@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 14:08:36 GMT, Matt wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I solved that problem years ago by filling the space under my bed with
>>> crates full of old HUAC reports.
>>>
>>> You seem to have missed the irony that you are so much like McCarthy's
>>> ghost in the way you without good reason repeatedly labeled me as a troll.
>>>
>>> I am not now, nor have I ever been ...
>>
>> That's funny...
>> The problem with many of these so called Linux advocates is that they are
>> on a mission, a religious mission, where they will take no prisoners.
>> IOW you are either with them 100 percent or you are the enemy.
>>
>> This is an extremely dangerous method to employ especially when you don't
>> have the ammunition and armor to sustain battle.
>>
>> A better approach, at this juncture in Linux's development, is to accept
>> what you can get, build upon it and work slowly, patiently and thoroughly
>> toward your goals.
>>
>> An example is Xandros, Novel, Linspire and hardware companies that DO write
>> Linux drivers but keep them proprietary.
>>
>> These companies should be embraced instead of boycotted because they are
>> increasing Linux's presence on the desktop.
>>
>> The radicals, like [Homer], Schestowitz and worst of all Mark Kent are not
>> doing Linux much good with their hate and vitriol against companies that
>> are in effect helping Linux.
>> They are however, making the Linux community look like a bunch of nutcases.
>
> Very well said.
>
> And yet only yesterday, Roy Kent was advocating patented closed source
> SW.
That's because they are hypocrites.
Look at Roy Schestowitz over on digg asking someone to link to the article
instead of to a 3rd party site.
Huh?????
What does Roy do all day?
Hypocrite.
Then we have [Homer] who fights tooth and nail against propriatary
software, yet he won't release to source code to his stats program he
foists on COLA once a week.
Hypocrite.
And the list goes on.
|
|
