Mary Lou Jepsen is one of the main people behind the OLPC (see <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Lou_Jepsen> for details). She posted to Slashdot to refute the FUD, which Roy is spreading in several places, that olpcnews.com is an Intel shill site:
Roy's evidence? Someone who write at olpcnews.com is a director of a division of IESC (<http://www.iesc.org/>) that has done some projects with Intel (and, among others, the Peace Corp, Africare, and Helen Keller international).
Tim Smith wrote: > Mary Lou Jepsen is one of the main people behind the OLPC (see > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Lou_Jepsen> for details). She > posted to Slashdot to refute the FUD, which Roy is spreading in > several places, that olpcnews.com is an Intel shill site:
> Roy's evidence? Someone who write at olpcnews.com is a director of a > division of IESC (<http://www.iesc.org/>) that has done some projects > with Intel (and, among others, the Peace Corp, Africare, and Helen > Keller international).
Nice.
But don't count on the utter public destruction of Roy's idiocy being nearly enough to make him change. James Gosling (of Sun and Java fame) told me himself in an email that Rex Ballard was a liar that he [Gosling] had never heard of, yet even after I posted that devastating refutation of his lies, Rex didn't stop claiming his work was the basis for Java.
The truth isn't nearly enough to keep nutcases like Roy Homer Rex from spewing their warped lies and misinterpretations of reality.
On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 20:40:41 -0800, Tim Smith wrote: > Mary Lou Jepsen is one of the main people behind the OLPC (see > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Lou_Jepsen> for details). She posted > to Slashdot to refute the FUD, which Roy is spreading in several places, > that olpcnews.com is an Intel shill site:
> Roy's evidence? Someone who write at olpcnews.com is a director of a > division of IESC (<http://www.iesc.org/>) that has done some projects > with Intel (and, among others, the Peace Corp, Africare, and Helen > Keller international).
On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 23:48:26 -0500, DFS wrote: > Tim Smith wrote: >> Mary Lou Jepsen is one of the main people behind the OLPC (see >> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Lou_Jepsen> for details). She >> posted to Slashdot to refute the FUD, which Roy is spreading in >> several places, that olpcnews.com is an Intel shill site:
>> Roy's evidence? Someone who write at olpcnews.com is a director of a >> division of IESC (<http://www.iesc.org/>) that has done some projects >> with Intel (and, among others, the Peace Corp, Africare, and Helen >> Keller international).
> Nice.
> But don't count on the utter public destruction of Roy's idiocy being nearly > enough to make him change. James Gosling (of Sun and Java fame) told me > himself in an email that Rex Ballard was a liar that he [Gosling] had never > heard of, yet even after I posted that devastating refutation of his lies, > Rex didn't stop claiming his work was the basis for Java.
> The truth isn't nearly enough to keep nutcases like Roy Homer Rex from > spewing their warped lies and misinterpretations of reality.
Rex Ballard actually claims that his work is the basis for Java? I thought that was some kind of a joke.
On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 20:40:41 -0800, Tim Smith wrote: > Mary Lou Jepsen is one of the main people behind the OLPC (see > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Lou_Jepsen> for details). She posted > to Slashdot to refute the FUD, which Roy is spreading in several places, > that olpcnews.com is an Intel shill site:
> Roy's evidence? Someone who write at olpcnews.com is a director of a > division of IESC (<http://www.iesc.org/>) that has done some projects > with Intel (and, among others, the Peace Corp, Africare, and Helen > Keller international).
____/ Tim Smith on Tuesday 15 January 2008 04:40 : \____
> Mary Lou Jepsen is one of the main people behind the OLPC (see > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Lou_Jepsen> for details). She posted > to Slashdot to refute the FUD, which Roy is spreading in several places, > that olpcnews.com is an Intel shill site:
> Roy's evidence? Someone who write at olpcnews.com is a director of a > division of IESC (<http://www.iesc.org/>) that has done some projects > with Intel (and, among others, the Peace Corp, Africare, and Helen > Keller international).
At least 5 sources that I read said it was an Intel guy. Thanks for the correction, which obviously came after some original article (not mine) had the Net poisoned with disinformation.
What's the matter with you, Timmy? Trying to portray this as some kind of war of OLPC /against/ me? Or Mary attacking me? Give me a break, shill. You're only trying to create civil wars (again!!).
-- ~~ Best of wishes
Roy S. Schestowitz | Open syntax, Open API's, Open Source http://Schestowitz.com | Free as in Free Beer | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E Cpu(s): 25.0%us, 4.1%sy, 1.0%ni, 65.8%id, 3.7%wa, 0.3%hi, 0.1%si, 0.0%st http://iuron.com - semantic engine to gather information
> Mary Lou Jepsen is one of the main people behind the OLPC (see > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Lou_Jepsen> for details). She posted > to Slashdot to refute the FUD, which Roy is spreading in several places, > that olpcnews.com is an Intel shill site:
> Roy's evidence? Someone who write at olpcnews.com is a director of a > division of IESC (<http://www.iesc.org/>) that has done some projects > with Intel (and, among others, the Peace Corp, Africare, and Helen > Keller international).
Why don't you provide the context?
Written *that* way you did, I can only conclude that you are lying (again) and purposefully avoided anything which would make checking of your and Roys claims easily possible -- Never put off till tomorrow what you can avoid all together.
On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 07:19:15 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> What's the matter with you, Timmy? Trying to portray this as some kind of war > of OLPC /against/ me? Or Mary attacking me? Give me a break, shill. You're > only trying to create civil wars (again!!).
You're an idiot Roy Schestowitz. You have an agenda. You are obviously being funded. You have fooled quite a few people who are so desperate to hear about Linux they will believe anyone, but you have not fooled everyone. Your day of reckoning will come, sooner or later, and you will flame out like all the rest of your ilk only to be forgotten at which point you can ponder about all of your wasted time. Hopefully the financial compensation is enough for the moment because your long term future looks dismal. A simple Google search is all that is needed. Your support of a loony toon like Rex Ballard just goes to prove how nutty you really are. One listen to your podcast, proves you are a total bore who barely has a command of the English language and who in truth sounds mentally retarded. That will surely go a long way toward your finding employment after your grant money runs out. NOT! And even if you should slip through the screening process, you will now have to deal with co-workers who will surely look up all kinds of dirt on you, and they will find plenty. Good luck. You will need it.
You do realize that at some point you may be asked to prove your claims against the likes of Novel, Microsoft etc. I've said it before and I will say it again, I hope you have a good attorney because you just might need one.
Erik Funkenbusch <e...@despam-funkenbusch.com> writes: > On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 20:40:41 -0800, Tim Smith wrote:
>> Mary Lou Jepsen is one of the main people behind the OLPC (see >> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Lou_Jepsen> for details). She posted >> to Slashdot to refute the FUD, which Roy is spreading in several places, >> that olpcnews.com is an Intel shill site:
>> Roy's evidence? Someone who write at olpcnews.com is a director of a >> division of IESC (<http://www.iesc.org/>) that has done some projects >> with Intel (and, among others, the Peace Corp, Africare, and Helen >> Keller international).
,---- | So for CmdrTaco to insinuate that OLPC News is a front for anyone but | them, insults you, dear reader, and every OLPC News contributor, | commenter, and supporter personally. To do so with out of date and | inaccurate information offends SlashDot itself. `----
In article <fmho04$34d$0...@news.t-online.com>, Peter Kohlmann <peter.koehlm...@t-online.de> wrote:
> Written *that* way you did, I can only conclude that you are lying (again) > and purposefully avoided anything which would make checking of your and > Roys claims easily possible
People who know how to use a browser can easily find all the relevant into. That leaves you out. If you can demonstrate that you've finally figured out how to follow links, I can give you some. (Of course, when they show you are wrong, you'll just come back with your usual claim that the links didn't work...).
Tim Smith wrote: > In article <fmho04$34d$0...@news.t-online.com>, > Peter Kohlmann <peter.koehlm...@t-online.de> wrote: >> Written *that* way you did, I can only conclude that you are lying >> (again) and purposefully avoided anything which would make checking of >> your and Roys claims easily possible
> People who know how to use a browser can easily find all the relevant > into. That leaves you out. If you can demonstrate that you've finally > figured out how to follow links, I can give you some. (Of course, when > they show you are wrong, you'll just come back with your usual claim > that the links didn't work...).
Translation: You have no links and made your claims up out of full cloth
In article <fmj77v$ain$0...@news.t-online.com>, Peter Kohlmann <peter.koehlm...@t-online.de> wrote:
> > People who know how to use a browser can easily find all the relevant > > into. That leaves you out. If you can demonstrate that you've finally > > figured out how to follow links, I can give you some. (Of course, when > > they show you are wrong, you'll just come back with your usual claim > > that the links didn't work...).
> Translation: You have no links and made your claims up out of full cloth
Peter, almost every time I've given you a link for the last several months, you've claimed you can't follow it. If you want, though, you can yourself go to boycottnovell, select the OLPC articles, and see what Roy has said.
Tim Smith wrote: > In article <fmj77v$ain$0...@news.t-online.com>, > Peter Kohlmann <peter.koehlm...@t-online.de> wrote: >> > People who know how to use a browser can easily find all the relevant >> > into. That leaves you out. If you can demonstrate that you've finally >> > figured out how to follow links, I can give you some. (Of course, when >> > they show you are wrong, you'll just come back with your usual claim >> > that the links didn't work...).
>> Translation: You have no links and made your claims up out of full cloth
> Peter, almost every time I've given you a link for the last several > months, you've claimed you can't follow it.
Wrong. I have said so *one* time And it was a broken link. I told you I can't be arsed to stitch it manually, if you are unable to provide working links as everyone else is able to do
So, just stop this bullshit about "several times". You are getting nearly as bad as Hadron Quark with your made up claims
> If you want, though, you can yourself go to boycottnovell, select the OLPC > articles, and see what Roy has said.
Good. Provide the link.
No, I will not hunt for something you just /claim/ to exist. I assume that you are lying. Prove me wrong, this time
-- Get the new Windows XP. Now with eXtra Problems included
> ____/ Tim Smith on Tuesday 15 January 2008 04:40 : \____
>> Mary Lou Jepsen is one of the main people behind the OLPC (see >> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Lou_Jepsen> for details). She posted >> to Slashdot to refute the FUD, which Roy is spreading in several places, >> that olpcnews.com is an Intel shill site:
>> Roy's evidence? Someone who write at olpcnews.com is a director of a >> division of IESC (<http://www.iesc.org/>) that has done some projects >> with Intel (and, among others, the Peace Corp, Africare, and Helen >> Keller international).
> At least 5 sources that I read said it was an Intel guy. Thanks for the > correction, which obviously came after some original article (not mine) had > the Net poisoned with disinformation.
> What's the matter with you, Timmy? Trying to portray this as some kind of war > of OLPC /against/ me? Or Mary attacking me? Give me a break, shill. You're > only trying to create civil wars (again!!).
Timmy requires perfection, Roy! You should know and understand that, after all, he's one of your best customers :-))
> Roy Schestowitz <newsgro...@schestowitz.com> espoused: >> ____/ Tim Smith on Tuesday 15 January 2008 04:40 : \____
>>> Mary Lou Jepsen is one of the main people behind the OLPC (see >>> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Lou_Jepsen> for details). She posted >>> to Slashdot to refute the FUD, which Roy is spreading in several places, >>> that olpcnews.com is an Intel shill site:
>>> Roy's evidence? Someone who write at olpcnews.com is a director of a >>> division of IESC (<http://www.iesc.org/>) that has done some projects >>> with Intel (and, among others, the Peace Corp, Africare, and Helen >>> Keller international).
>> At least 5 sources that I read said it was an Intel guy. Thanks for the >> correction, which obviously came after some original article (not mine) had >> the Net poisoned with disinformation.
>> What's the matter with you, Timmy? Trying to portray this as some kind of >> war of OLPC /against/ me? Or Mary attacking me? Give me a break, shill. >> You're only trying to create civil wars (again!!).
> Timmy requires perfection, Roy! You should know and understand that, > after all, he's one of your best customers :-))
Well, he can require that from himself. He should stop policing me on the Web (which he still does all the time, including in Digg.com).
If I don't want to proofread what I type, I'm not f***ing going to, certainly not for some stalker who is apparently a single man in his 50s.
-- ~~ Best of wishes
Roy S. Schestowitz | http://debian.org http://Schestowitz.com | RHAT Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E 09:20:02 up 36 days, 22:08, 4 users, load average: 1.64, 1.51, 1.36 http://iuron.com - Open Source knowledge engine project
On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 09:23:32 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote: > ____/ Mark Kent on Wednesday 16 January 2008 08:55 : \____
>> Roy Schestowitz <newsgro...@schestowitz.com> espoused: >>> ____/ Tim Smith on Tuesday 15 January 2008 04:40 : \____
>>>> Mary Lou Jepsen is one of the main people behind the OLPC (see >>>> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Lou_Jepsen> for details). She posted >>>> to Slashdot to refute the FUD, which Roy is spreading in several places, >>>> that olpcnews.com is an Intel shill site:
>>>> Roy's evidence? Someone who write at olpcnews.com is a director of a >>>> division of IESC (<http://www.iesc.org/>) that has done some projects >>>> with Intel (and, among others, the Peace Corp, Africare, and Helen >>>> Keller international).
>>> At least 5 sources that I read said it was an Intel guy. Thanks for the >>> correction, which obviously came after some original article (not mine) had >>> the Net poisoned with disinformation.
>>> What's the matter with you, Timmy? Trying to portray this as some kind of >>> war of OLPC /against/ me? Or Mary attacking me? Give me a break, shill. >>> You're only trying to create civil wars (again!!).
>> Timmy requires perfection, Roy! You should know and understand that, >> after all, he's one of your best customers :-))
> Well, he can require that from himself. He should stop policing me on the Web > (which he still does all the time, including in Digg.com).
> If I don't want to proofread what I type, I'm not f***ing going to, certainly > not for some stalker who is apparently a single man in his 50s.
Policing YOU on the web? You fscking idiot. You're the one always telling people what they should do, especially on digg. And you have some nerve slamming a site that makes money from hits considering you are doing the same thing with your misleading subject lines and pure FUD.
Roy Schestowitz <newsgro...@schestowitz.com> writes: > Well, he can require that from himself. He should stop policing me on the Web > (which he still does all the time, including in Digg.com).
> If I don't want to proofread what I type, I'm not f***ing going to, certainly > not for some stalker who is apparently a single man in his 50s.
"I do not want to proofread what I type"
Thanks for that Roy.
It pretty much sums you up. You couldn't even be arsed to prepare yourself for that webcast about XML standards and made a , predictably, right fool of yourself.
Way to advocate Linux!
"I do not want to proofread what I type"
You're unravelling. Get a holiday. Maybe Holland? You could model for some more posters by Marti?
On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 17:25:05 +0100, Hadron wrote: > Roy Schestowitz <newsgro...@schestowitz.com> writes:
>> Well, he can require that from himself. He should stop policing me on the Web >> (which he still does all the time, including in Digg.com).
>> If I don't want to proofread what I type, I'm not f***ing going to, certainly >> not for some stalker who is apparently a single man in his 50s.
> "I do not want to proofread what I type"
> Thanks for that Roy.
> It pretty much sums you up. You couldn't even be arsed to prepare > yourself for that webcast about XML standards and made a , predictably, > right fool of yourself.
> Way to advocate Linux!
> "I do not want to proofread what I type"
> You're unravelling. Get a holiday. Maybe Holland? You could model for > some more posters by Marti?
Hysterical. Of course *he* doesn't proof read most of what he writes. It's generated by a well programmed script. And if it's not, by his own criteria, he MUST be getting paid to sit at a computer all day and post 1000's of articles per month to every corner of the Internet. Spamming has evidently become a full time occupation for Roy.
In article <1656003.NOcAedW...@schestowitz.com>, Roy Schestowitz <newsgro...@schestowitz.com> wrote:
> Well, he can require that from himself. He should stop policing me on the Web > (which he still does all the time, including in Digg.com).
Roy, you've confused digg.com with your diary. If you don't want your writings to be read and commented on, then don't post them to a place that is DESIGNED TO ALLOW ANYONE TO READ AND COMMENT ON THEM. Geesh!
> If I don't want to proofread what I type, I'm not f***ing going to, certainly > not for some stalker who is apparently a single man in his 50s.
This is exactly the same as people who top-post on usenet. It makes their posts harder to read, and their excuse is that it takes too long to move the cursor to the bottom of the screen. So, to save themselves the 5 seconds it would take to follow social norms for usenet and move their cursor before starting, they are willing to slow down everyone who reads their post.
If you don't care enough about your comments to bother making them legible, or don't care about your readers enough to spend 10 seconds checking a comment before submitting it, you are going to continue to get dugg down. Your choice.
Speaking of stalking, you have been trying to figure out where I live (and doing your usual quality work, as you missed by almost 5000 miles), and now you seem to have tried to find my age (also wrong), sex (right), and current marital status (right). What's your name for this?
On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 14:05:59 -0800, Tim Smith wrote: > Speaking of stalking, you have been trying to figure out where I live > (and doing your usual quality work, as you missed by almost 5000 miles), > and now you seem to have tried to find my age (also wrong), sex (right), > and current marital status (right). What's your name for this?
In article <1ve7mc2wiqili$.1hiq5br3nqqsv$....@40tude.net>, Moshe Goldfarb <brick.n.st...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Speaking of stalking, you have been trying to figure out where I live > > (and doing your usual quality work, as you missed by almost 5000 miles), > > and now you seem to have tried to find my age (also wrong), sex (right), > > and current marital status (right). What's your name for this?
> Please email me Tim. My address is real.
I generally don't mail random people on the net. Could you give some hint as to what the purpose would be? For all I know, you are one of Roy's nyms!
On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 18:31:36 -0800, Tim Smith wrote: > In article <1ve7mc2wiqili$.1hiq5br3nqqsv$....@40tude.net>, > Moshe Goldfarb <brick.n.st...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Speaking of stalking, you have been trying to figure out where I live >>> (and doing your usual quality work, as you missed by almost 5000 miles), >>> and now you seem to have tried to find my age (also wrong), sex (right), >>> and current marital status (right). What's your name for this?
>> Please email me Tim. My address is real.
> I generally don't mail random people on the net. Could you give some > hint as to what the purpose would be? For all I know, you are one of > Roy's nyms!
I suspect I might be having the same problem as you are.
On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 18:31:36 -0800, Tim Smith <reply_in_gr...@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
> In article <1ve7mc2wiqili$.1hiq5br3nqqsv$....@40tude.net>, > Moshe Goldfarb <brick.n.st...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > Speaking of stalking, you have been trying to figure out where I live >> > (and doing your usual quality work, as you missed by almost 5000 miles), >> > and now you seem to have tried to find my age (also wrong), sex (right), >> > and current marital status (right). What's your name for this?
>> Please email me Tim. My address is real.
> I generally don't mail random people on the net. Could you give some > hint as to what the purpose would be? For all I know, you are one of > Roy's nyms!
In article <1psfxezox6oo2.90q9ahb2ydlq$....@40tude.net>, Moshe Goldfarb <brick.n.st...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> Speaking of stalking, you have been trying to figure out where I live > >>> (and doing your usual quality work, as you missed by almost 5000 miles), > >>> and now you seem to have tried to find my age (also wrong), sex (right), > >>> and current marital status (right). What's your name for this?
> >> Please email me Tim. My address is real.
> > I generally don't mail random people on the net. Could you give some > > hint as to what the purpose would be? For all I know, you are one of > > Roy's nyms!
> I suspect I might be having the same problem as you are.
Well, I don't think I'm having a problem. Whatever method he's using to research me is so inaccurate that if he hadn't announced the results of his investigation, I would not have been able to detect it.
All the information I have is that he's said he thinks I live in the UK, that I'm male, that I'm in my 50's, and that I'm single. Since I haven't stated most of that information in any place he is likely to have seen without searching, it seems he's looking. (But finding the wrong Tim Smith? Or, since he's said that he doesn't think that is my real name, perhaps he's searching for some other name?).
That's all I know about it. If someone is investigating you, and are doing a good enough job that you've actually noticed, than it probably isn't Roy.
> On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 18:31:36 -0800, > Tim Smith <reply_in_gr...@mouse-potato.com> wrote: >> In article <1ve7mc2wiqili$.1hiq5br3nqqsv$....@40tude.net>, >> Moshe Goldfarb <brick.n.st...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > Speaking of stalking, you have been trying to figure out where I live >>> > (and doing your usual quality work, as you missed by almost 5000 miles), >>> > and now you seem to have tried to find my age (also wrong), sex (right), >>> > and current marital status (right). What's your name for this?
>>> Please email me Tim. My address is real.
>> I generally don't mail random people on the net. Could you give some >> hint as to what the purpose would be? For all I know, you are one of >> Roy's nyms!
> Oh it's a nym alright, doubt it's Roy's though!
I never had nyms. Once again the trolls are spreading the Big Lie.
