__/ [ Kier ] on Sunday 08 April 2007 14:26 \__
> 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.
>
>> 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
> appear to be the least bit interested in encouraging goood advocacy habits.
Yes, he is extremely rude and he could truly use another long break like the
one he took around Christmas. It would probably lift his mood and help him
find hobbies that are more satisfying than cursing the whole world to
inflate and elevate his own ego.
>> 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.
>
> 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?
I still wonder why he is afraid of posting under his real name. Is he afraid
or ashamed of what he says? Is he only as brave as children who spit down at
people on the sidewalk, reigning from the roof and then hiding? It's people
like 'Hadron Quark' that give this forum the reputation of a playground. The
only person whose behaviour is worse /might/ be Gary, who has taken his
insults against me to Digg.com (he still has a live account there).
--
~~ With kind regards
Roy S. Schestowitz | "Ping this IP, see if it collapses" --Windows TCP
http://Schestowitz.com | Open Prospects ¦ PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
Tasks: 117 total, 1 running, 112 sleeping, 0 stopped, 4 zombie
http://iuron.com - knowledge engine, not a search engine
|
|
