On Sun, 08 Apr 2007 15:46:19 +0200, Hadron Quark wrote:
> Kier <vallon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> On Sun, 08 Apr 2007 14:22:44 +0200, Hadron Quark wrote:
>>
>>> Kier <vallon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, 08 Apr 2007 11:56:14 +0100, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> __/ [ Kier ] on Sunday 08 April 2007 10:47 \__
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, 08 Apr 2007 04:59:39 +0100, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I didn't read the whole article, but I looked at the headline and the
>>>>>>> closing paragraphs. Erik is nitpicking here, but I'll admit I was
>>>>>>> unintentionally inaccurate. Lying is /deliberate/. What happened here was
>>>>>>> /accidental/. And it happens in every news site every now and then, even
>>>>>>> in Groklaw.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You should start reading the articlkes more, then. Far better to be
>>>>>> scrupulous, and post fewer articles that you *know* you can stand by, than
>>>>>> go for volume and be caught out like this. remember, the folk in the
>>>>>> 'Opposition' are not always wrong, and 'our' side is not always right.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The more careful and scrupulous you are, the less ammunition your critics
>>>>>> have.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks, Kier, for the advice. I do try to read the articles carefully and
>>>>> sometimes in full (PJ does this as well before posting anything), but it
>>>>> does not guarantee that the article is accurate (Linux.com corrected
>>>>> BoycottNovell.com in the past because a major publication had a mistake that
>>>>> led to a 'broken telephone' effect). Sometimes you are held responsible for
>>>>> someone else's mistake as there's no peer review.
>>>>
>>>> That's true. But I think it's fair to say not all of your inaccuracies can
>>>> be put down to someone else's carelessness. You must always strive to be
>>>> as factual and above-board as possible. Of course, mistakes will always be
>>>> made, we're only human. Just do your best to avoid them
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> You can never avoid accidents altgother, but you can reduce their frequency.
>>>>
>>>> Agreed. That's why I suggested that perhaps you post less material, so you
>>>> have time to be certain of its veracity. Or maybe it's time for a new
>>>> approach altogether. There are so many important issues in Linux-land that
>>>> just don't seem to be getting discussed here.
>>>>
>>>> Here's one idea, just off the top of my head. How about something like:
>>>> 'Important Topic of the Day'? An example might be, 'Is the GPLv3 an
>>>> improvement over v2 What are the likely implications for the future?'.
>>>>
>>>> I'm sure there are lots of subjects out there just waiting to be
>>>> discussed. Why not give it some thought?
>>>>
>>>> <snip>
>>>
>>> Because the Roybot is interested in getting his name in lights. Quantity
>>
>> First, never forget the person at the other end of the line is as human as
>> you. He's not 'the Roybot'. Second, unless you can read his mind, you
>> really don't know *what* his motive is. But of course, you assume the
>> worst one.
>
> Kier - don't be so prissy. One can glean information form the facts at
> hand. And the Roybot constantly lies and misrepresents. He has an
> agenda. And that agenda is to reflect badly on MS and proprietary SW
> regardless how inaccurate pr vile his slander is-
Again, calling him 'the Roybot' does nothing to help the situation. And
exactly what 'facts' are you talking about? He posts a lot, in lots of
forums, etc. Big deal. That's presumably because he's interested in that
kind of thing. Evidently, he's pasionate about Linux and FOSS in general.
Wish I had a tenth of that much energy and enthusiasm for anything these
days. That enthusiasm may have led him too often into folly, but that's
what kids are like.
And he doesn't, as far as I can see, 'constantly lie and misrepresent'.
Sometimes, yes, and that is occasionally due to carelessness.
>
>>
>>> over quality. His almost insane hatred for anything proprietary drives
>>> him to lie, slur and misrepresent at every opportunity. If he *did*
>>> spend more time bigging up Linux as opposed to digging out slurs against
>>> Microsoft then his behaviour would not be so "vile and disgusting".
>>
>> Frankly, your behaviour is hardly anything to crow about. All you do is
>> sling insults and act like you're superior to everyone else. You don't
>
> I dont "act superior". If I come across as "superior" its because
> generally I will only argue a corner from strength. Sorry if that is
> "arrogant" to you.
Bullshit. You show every sign of assuming you're always right, but you
aren't always right.
>
>> appear to be the least bit interested in encouraging goood advocacy
>> habits.
>
> Clearly bullshit as any quick glance to any Linux group outside of here
> will reveal. What i don't advocate are lies and untruths. You don't like
> them either I thought?
No, I don't. And I don't know anything whatever about your behaviour
outside of here. In COLA, you show little sign of wishing to encourage
good advocacy habits.
>
>>
>>>
>>> The Roybot might even be a script. This reply to you should make it
>>> clear why:
>>>
>>>>> You can never avoid accidents altgother, but you can reduce their frequency.
>>>
>>> The Roybot seems to be programmed to state the bleeding obvious at every
>>> opportunity and yet phrase it was if it were some deep, thinking
>>> masterpiece of modern thinking. Notice above as it tries to educate you
>>> as to why the lies and vile, disgusting, misrepresentations are there.
>>
>> Educate me? Please, don't be stupid. He's as entitled as anyone to state
>> his opinions and make a case for his point of view. There's no law that
>> says he has to be original or non-obvious. You're the one who thinks
>> exaggerations are okay, anyway.
>
> What "point of view"? What are you talking about? Did my point clear
> your bows? Has Roy successfully blinded you to his techniques be merely
> saying
Please don't talk bollocks. You keep on about vile lies disgusting
misrepresentations, yet some of his views are hardly unique to him. Yes,
some people actually do think MS is as bad as that. I don't necessarily
agree. But others do.
>
> "You can never avoid accidents altgother, but you can reduce their
> frequency."
> ????
>
>>
>> Calling him 'Roybot' is completely unhelpful. Why don't you try making
>> some polite suggestions as to how he could improve his posts, rather than
>> simply name-calling? Or is that totally beyond you?
>
> Grow up you prissy little jobsworth. I did make some suggestions : stop
> telling lies and misrepresenting other peoples hard work. Post
> less. Post accurately.
Insulting him while you do that is hardly going to encourage him to listen
to you. Ever thought of that? Calling me a prissy little jobsworth does
nothing to advance your point of view either. Slinging silly names is
easy. Can you come up with anything more constructive?
--
Kier
|
|
