waterskidoo <water.skidoo@xxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>>
>> No, my post indicates that I am a Linux advocate, advocating Linux and
>> demoting the competition, in a Linux advocacy group. I am not invading
>> non-Linux forums/groups/threads/blogs with anti-Windows or pro-Linux
>> rhetoric, unlike the Trolls in this group, and Windows zealots elsewhere.
>>
>> So ... what is *your* motivation ... for defending Windows Shills in the
>> Linux Advocacy group?
>
>
> You've written quite a piece there, far too much to comment on but
> I do agree with some of it.
> My disagreement is with Linux supporters who call every Tom, Dick and
> Jane a Windows shill because my understanding of a shill is a person
> who is working for someone or some company that has a stake in what
> is being discussed, in this case Windows or Linux, but does not
> reveal that he is associated with said person or company.
> For example Ballmar posting in COLA under a assumed name and
> saying how great Windows is.
There have been many shilling campaigns, a number of which have been
directly exposed. Roy S. has links to articles which show this stuff in
detail; examples include pro-Microsoft "grass-roots support" letters to
newspapers from people who are /dead/. Other examples include
Microsoft's own emails in the court cases where these have been exposed
describing in detail how to get pro-Microsoft representatives onto
panels, doing presentations, and so on. More recent examples include
the populating of standards-bodies with Microsoft "partners" and
Microsoft's own employees to push OOXML, a completely proprietary pile
of junk that only a Windows zealot could love, through standards bodies,
some of which have /already/ approved ODF.
There is plenty more evidence of this kind of behaviour, but those
should keep you going for now.
>
> I just don't see this happening to the extent that Linux
> advocates are claiming
See my remarks above, also, there are /many/ more examples.
> and in fact if you compare the reputation
> that the Linux community has for being zealots to that
> of the Windows community it's no contest. Linux users
> for whatever reason have a reputation for that kind of stuff.
This is because there has been a huge, paid-for campaign to create that
impression. If you look on Windows fora and newsgroups of pretty much
any kind, you'll find few, if any, linux people posting on them. You'll
find here that virtually no pro-charter, on-topic poster here would ever
cross-post to a Windows group, for example. On the other hand, you'll
find any number of Microsoft and/or Windows trolls posting here, and in
pretty much any other arena where Linux is mentioned, and you'll find
/those/ people using terms like "linux zealots", when indeed, the
zealotry is very much on their part.
>
> As for defending Windows shills, I don't defend anyone but
> I also don't accuse people willy nilly of being paid shills
> without some verifiable proof.
There's plenty out there, just take a look.
--
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
| Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
| Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
| My (new) blog: http://www.thereisnomagic.org |
|
|
