Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: Ballmer: Microsoft Moves from Quality Software to Public Brainwash

  • Subject: Re: Ballmer: Microsoft Moves from Quality Software to Public Brainwash
  • From: Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 19:28:41 +0100
  • Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
  • Organization: schestowitz.com / ISBE, Manchester University / ITS
  • References: <1925643.Fj3PSTTG76@schestowitz.com> <1156094732.975162.260120@74g2000cwt.googlegroups.com> <IvmGg.8745$395.4028@edtnps90> <1156184414.240979.104530@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>
  • Reply-to: newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • User-agent: KNode/0.7.2
__/ [ nessuno@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ] on Monday 21 August 2006 19:20 \__

> Oliver Wong wrote:
>> <nessuno@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> news:1156094732.975162.260120@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > Dear Roy,
>> >
>> > I'm posting here instead of below the recent impersonation, because I
>> > don't want to add to it.
>> [...]
>> >
>> > In cases like this I have noticed that not a single Windows advocate
>> > ever speaks up to condemn this kind of behavior.
>>
>>     When I saw (the real) Roy's reply of "This isn't me" (paraphrased,
>>     can't
>> recall the exact wording), I was considering replying with something along
>> the lines of "Don't worry, I doubt anyone would actually think this was
>> written by you, Roy." but decided it didn't add enough value to the
>> thread, and like you, I didn't want to add to it unless I really did have
>> something valuable to contribute.
>>
>>     That being said, for the record, I'll state that I condem that
>> behaviour. I thought it'd be obvious that I wouldn't approve of it, but I
>> find a lot of things I thought would be obvious about my positions turn
>> out not to be so obvious on this newsgroup. So there, I've said it: I
>> don't approve.
>>
>>     I'll go one step further, and tell you, Roy, to persevere. Obviously,
>> someone out there doesn't like you or your viewpoints, but rather than
>> agreeing-to-disagree, or addressing your viewpoints, they decide to
>> anonymously attack your character. That's completely childish, and no
>> rational person would have their opinion of you swayed in anyway by those
>> attacks. Just ignore them. That they would resort to such tactics shows
>> their desperation and your success.
>
> Dear Oliver,
> 
> I really, sincerely appreciate your decency.  Sometimes I use the term
> "windows advocate" because it's a polite if somewhat inaccurate way of
> referring to some of the people who post here.  I know you consider
> yourself an advocate of choice (the best OS for the purpose), and my
> impression of the posts of yours that I've seen is that you are indeed
> very balanced and fair.

Yes, I concur. And Roy C's label assignment should probably be
revised/changed. I have always enjoyed discussions with Oliver. Mark feels
very differently about this, but I digress.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index