__/ [ cc ] on Sunday 10 December 2006 16:35 \__
> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>> __/ [ cc ] on Sunday 10 December 2006 14:11 \__
>> > Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; .NET CLR
>> > 1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe) Complaints-To:
>> What are you doing here anyway?
>> > Robert Newson wrote:
>> >> Mark Kent wrote:
>> >> Instead of warning in the subject line about the length of the post,
>> >> could you not put a message about the news digest and then reply to it
>> >> with the
>> >> long message. Even though you warn in the subject, I have yet to find
>> >> a way for my newsreader to avoid reading the message if I fail to
>> >> manually spot it.
>> >> By posting a warning and then the message as a reply to it, they would
>> >> be threaded on my newsreader and I could kill the thread before wasting
>> >> the time downloading the ~2000 lines.
>> > Or he could not post it at all. Since Roy has taken to lying in the
>> > subjects of his [News] posts now, I don't really think it's appropriate
>> > to post all the articles again, without any replies showing the ones
>> > which are dishonest.
>> Are they truly dishonest? Or is it simply the case that one among many
>> messages that I post accidently contains an error? Just because you don't
>> like the subject lines does not /necessarily/ make them erroneous. It is a
>> Linux advocacy newsgroup. It's not your daily news, whose purpose is to
>> present both sides no matter which one is rightful and which side's
>> argument isn't even worth attention. Even newspapers, I might add, are
>> inclined to please their funding sources, so there's a hidden agenda and
>> Best wishes,
> It's not that I don't like them. "PS3 has begun shipping with Linux
> Pre-installed" is just an out and out lie for instance. Many times the
> subject is just misleading, and well, since I don't know for sure I
> guess we'll have to let those slide. But I find it hard to believe that
> on the ones that are completely wrong that you don't know what you are
> doing. Why isn't the subject of the [News] posts the title of the
> article you're quoting anyway?
I will admit that I was wrong on the PS3 shipping thing, but it was /NOT/
deliberate. I am sometimes in a hurry and I can't read everything
thoroughly. As I said before, it is easy to find flaws somewhere in a big
pool of messages. I am not trying to noisify in order to use a nitpicking
argument. I just think that these stories ought to be filed and documented
properly. PJ's research, for example, greatly benefits from all these
lobbying and bribery stories, which she often puts among the News Picks.
The last question is a fair one. I often quote a segment of something
broader. For example, minutes ago I posted something titles "the zombie
lifestyle" (or something along these lines). It was an eclectic story from
TheStreet, which has this reproting fashion (same with MarketWatch). What I
brought forward, however, was a nugget of information. Microsoft is sidling
with the Chinese industry in its fight against Google---that which resisted
before caving to censorship (same with DoJ subpoenas). This seems like news
that escaped the attention of mainstream media because there is nothing
official, yet. Why enter the discussion ahead of announcements? Because, as
we now discover, with respect to Thailand's IT minister (or the equivalent
of that role), Microsoft had a flirt before Open Source was publicly
smashed. Steretypes and FUD as usual. It's part of a pattern. The technical
merits of Linux are not enough to defeat marketing and political pressures.
History says that inferiors products are often the ones that won. Let's
reverse the trend by eliminating between-the-lines and under-the-table
tactics. Let the best technology win. Not the toughest thugs, who gradually
pile up dirty money.
~~ Kind greetings and happy holidays!
Roy S. Schestowitz | $> wget -r -erobots=off http://www.*
http://Schestowitz.com | RHAT GNU/Linux ¦ PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
6:00pm up 53 days 4:14, 8 users, load average: 1.07, 0.95, 0.85
http://iuron.com - help build a non-profit search engine