On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 10:34:25 -0600, chrisv
<chrisv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>No, I thought you were OK because I didn't see dishonest bullshit from
>you.
Exactly what is dishonest about what I wrote?
>Like your "disturbing" bullshit above, claiming that many in the
>"Linux/OSS community" feel "entitled to everything for free", as if
>the "Linux/OSS community" is any worse in this regard than the
>population at large.
Where did I say it was any worse?
>Windows users don't pirate Windows and Windows applications, "George"?
>They don't unlawfully "share" copyrighted music and video? Oh, of
>course not - it's those Open-Source folks who are unusually unethical,
>leading you to be "disturbed".
Where did I say they didn't?
In fact where did I mention Windows at all.
I'm speaking in general about unlawful copying, usage and so
forth.
>And then there's your "You're a hypocrite if you use Windows in your
>day job but advocate Linux at night", right out of the Wintroll
>handbook, and as assholish and fsckwitted a position as there is.
Why is that?
It's hypocritical and in light of seeing posts in this group and
others talking about the large amount of Linux jobs available and
how the pay is higher I would think finding a job that uses Linux
and oss wouldn't be a problem.
See the deep rooted hate for Microsoft I would think that having
to use Windows each day would drive some people crazy.
The difference between a person who likes to use Linux at might
but needs Windows to do his job by day and a Linux advocate who
trashes others for doing what he does as well is huge.
See my priest analogy in another reply.
>Asshole.
Whatever.
George Barca
georgebarca1981@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|
|
