In article <4277705.akaHCyyWOy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Miss the point, at least post an article from him that supports your
> > argument, it doesn't make you look like a shill instead of him....
>
> I see these articles on a daily basis (last seen an hour ago). These are post
> under the technology section (Microsoft stuff in particular). That stuff is
> being drowned among a pile of garbage/dross that fits other themes.
So, you've retreated from claiming he's posting 2800+ FUD items, to he's
posting some FUD, and a bunch of non-technology stuff that drowns it
out. Well, let's take a look at his last week's submissions to the
Technology section, shall we?
---------------------------
Microsoft may take on iTV at CES in January
1st New Year worm on the loose
The people behind the online mapping software - or who killed James Kim
Top 10 girl geeks
Top Ten Security Threats for 2007
Audacity 1.3 beta available
New Microsoft Windows CSRSS Information Disclosure Vulnerability
2006 dubbed the "Year of the Zombies"
What is Scrapo.com?
How to Hack Vista's ReadyBoost
Apple shares seesaw again
The Best of Web 2.0 - Digg makes the cut
Powershell script to append a file
Ten tech trends for 2007
Digg Has A Problem With SEO
Visto Awarded $7.7 Million in Damages
How to: Adobe v8 install using customization tool
The battle of the SMS 2003 books
Restarting Services via WMI
20 best PC downloads for 2007
The Year in Online Video
Security Watch: Firefox flaws
Can God Save Internet Explorer?
AOL blocks communications on Port 25
Digger sells your vote
New Digg Option Lets Podcasters Get More Traffic, Money
Video News: Red Hat on a run
Amazon Launches New Q&A Service
Amateurs reach for high-end digital cameras
Got Monitoring? Pingdom Has It
---------------------------
Note that there are at least 7 there that would be right at home on an
anti-Microsoft site, out of 30.
So...first it was his 2800+ submissions. When you were shown to be wrong
about that, it was his comments. When you were shown to be wrong about
that, it was his submissions in Technology. Now you've been shown to be
wrong about that, too. Care to revise your claim yet again?
--
--Tim Smith
|
|
