> Certainly not what I have been hearing on this ng about Roy.
<quote>
What I find more interesting though, is that there are posts and other
articles written to try and defame or discredit him. And some use some
very strong language. Simply doing a Google search for "Roy
Schestowitz" comes up with some examples. What in the world is going
on here, and why are people trying so hard to discredit him for his
articles on techrights.org?
</quote>
Attempted character defamation seems to be the only ploy the lying
trolls posting here have.
-- If people are good only because they fear punishment, and hope for
reward, then we are a sorry lot indeed. -Albert Einstein
>> Certainly not what I have been hearing on this ng about Roy.
> <quote>
> What I find more interesting though, is that there are posts and other
> articles written to try and defame or discredit him. And some use some
> very strong language. Simply doing a Google search for "Roy
> Schestowitz" comes up with some examples. What in the world is going
> on here, and why are people trying so hard to discredit him for his
> articles on techrights.org?
> </quote>
> Attempted character defamation seems to be the only ploy the lying
> trolls posting here have.
Especially flatfish Gary Stewart and the filthy cretin Hadron Snit Larry are doing this on a regular base. Even now, years after Roys last posts to cola, these thugs are going after him relentlessly. Seems they don't like being on the wrong side
On Thursday 19 July 2012 07:35 Peter Köhlmann wrote:
> Especially flatfish Gary Stewart and the filthy cretin Hadron Snit Larry
> are doing this on a regular base. Even now, years after Roys last posts to
> cola, these thugs are going after him relentlessly. Seems they don't like
> being on the wrong side
Certainly as far as flatfish, DFS, Hadron etc are concerned, I think that you are right in the money with that statement, Peter.
There was distinct change in their postings, and it happened over a relatively short period. If I had to put a date to it, I'd say that it was at the time that Android started to become popular, and they realised that the world was changing.
- At first, there was a denial that Android was Linux. That died a death when the Android code went into the kernel!
- Then came the realisation that Linux is the ubiquitous OS for everything except the desktop.
- Next therefore came a stress on "desktop" whenever statistics were posted.
That's a bit of a strange one, considering that all the statistics apply to web access!
i.e. Desktops being used for web access aren't actually being used as desktops, if you see what I mean. Now consumers are shunning the desktop/laptop in favour of tablets and phones, and not Microsoft kit.
- Finally we have the first signs of the Big Change - flatfish and the "I actually like Android"!
bbgruff wrote:
> On Thursday 19 July 2012 07:35 Peter Köhlmann wrote:
>> Especially flatfish Gary Stewart and the filthy cretin Hadron Snit Larry
>> are doing this on a regular base. Even now, years after Roys last posts
>> to cola, these thugs are going after him relentlessly. Seems they don't
>> like being on the wrong side
> Certainly as far as flatfish, DFS, Hadron etc are concerned, I think that
> you are right in the money with that statement, Peter.
> There was distinct change in their postings, and it happened over a
> relatively short period. If I had to put a date to it, I'd say that it
> was at the time that Android started to become popular, and they realised
> that the world was changing.
> - At first, there was a denial that Android was Linux. That died a death
> when the Android code went into the kernel!
> - Then came the realisation that Linux is the ubiquitous OS for everything
> except the desktop.
> - Next therefore came a stress on "desktop" whenever statistics were
> posted. That's a bit of a strange one, considering that all the statistics
> apply to web access!
> i.e. Desktops being used for web access aren't actually being used as
> desktops, if you see what I mean. Now consumers are shunning the
> desktop/laptop in favour of tablets and phones, and not Microsoft kit.
> - Finally we have the first signs of the Big Change - flatfish and the "I
> actually like Android"!
Flatfish Gary Stewart also "liked" linux. Several times
He installed a distro, he praised it for days.
And then he started to find "issues", mostly googled ones nobody else could reproduce.
Not long and he labeled linux as "shitty" and "amateurish"
It will be the same routine with android. After all, the so much better win-
phones need some boost from that lying freak
>Certainly not what I have been hearing on this ng about Roy.
#1) It's some article written by an anonymous author calling himself "apexwm" - which could be anyone including Roy himself or a personal friend. Whoever it was defending Schestowitz they didn't even have the conviction to put their name behind it.
#2) Read some of the comments - such as this one:
<quote>
"The articles are very well written and all sources for the articles are documented". Let's look at that.
First, "well written". In fact they are childishly written. He plays dumb games with the names. He never talks about iPhone or iPad--they are always hypePhone and hypePad. The BBC is MSBBC. Florien Mueller is "Microsoft Florien". And so on and so on. But if anyone calls him "Spamowitz" or "Glen Schestowitz" he complains bitterly about how his enemies are attacking him.
Second, "documents". To be documented they need to cite verifiable THIRD PARTY sources. His articles do have an impressive number of links in them. Most link back to earlier articles of his own.
</quote>
Finallly - If you want to see what a dishonest scumbag liar Roy Schestowitz search this newsgroup for "Microsoft Offices Searched for Hookers." (Interesting title, yes?). Then the Schestowitz scumbag puts this into his post:
<quote>
Federal investigators executed a search warrant at Microsoft's Mountain View, Calif., offices earlier this month as part of an investigation into a high-priced call girl ring similar to the one used by former New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer.
</quote>
It sure sounds pretty damning... unless you read the next paragraph that he "conveniently" left out.
<quote>
The investigator, IRS special agent Anthony Romero, was seeking the Microsoft Hotmail account records of a woman accused of involvement in a pricey escort service operating out of Denver, Colo. Records show that Romero seized from Microsoft more than 3,000 files of "preserved data" from the account of Kitty_Crim...@hotmail.com.
Authorities believe that "Kitty Crimson" is actually Heather Bruck, a Denver-area woman who allegedly worked as a prostitute for an escort service that went by the names Denver Sugar and Denver Players, according to court papers.
No arrests have been made to date in connection with the Denver Sugar/Denver Players escort ring. There's no indication that Microsoft or any of its employees are involved with the ring.
</quote>
The Roy Schestowitz scumbag twisted the headline into something deliberately misleading ("Microsoft's Offices Searched for Hookers") then intentionally posts a small portion of the story in order to imply that Microsoft is being searched for hookers.
This is just one of many posts where he shows his dishonesty. Any bad things said about Schestowitz were earned and are certainly deserving. This is just one of *many* examples that shows what a dishonest scumbag Roy Schestowitz is.
-- Earlier today I spoke again with a lobby of Microsoft shareholders. They came to /me/ because they want to toss Steve Ballmer and I helped them gather material.
Roy Schestowitz having delusions of grandeur
<34363814.6pryxZo...@schestowitz.com>
>>Certainly not what I have been hearing on this ng about Roy.
> #1) It's some article written by an anonymous author calling himself > "apexwm" - which could be anyone including Roy himself or a personal friend. > Whoever it was defending Schestowitz they didn't even have the conviction to > put their name behind it.
MadHatter is a confirmed Roy shill.
Like you say, the author is anonymous and is no doubt a Roy shill.
Had this been an article about a Windows supporter the Linux loons
would be going wild.
> #2) Read some of the comments - such as this one:
> <quote>
> "The articles are very well written and all sources for the articles are > documented". Let's look at that.
Notice these are precisely the two main points people take exception
to.
Coincidence?
I think not.
> First, "well written". In fact they are childishly written. He plays dumb > games with the names. He never talks about iPhone or iPad--they are always > hypePhone and hypePad. The BBC is MSBBC. Florien Mueller is "Microsoft > Florien". And so on and so on. But if anyone calls him "Spamowitz" or "Glen > Schestowitz" he complains bitterly about how his enemies are attacking him.
> Second, "documents". To be documented they need to cite verifiable THIRD > PARTY sources. His articles do have an impressive number of links in them. > Most link back to earlier articles of his own.
> </quote>
That's Roy to a tee....
Legitimate journalists would have a hard time staying employed if
they used the same tactics Roy Schestowitz does.
Unless they worked for The National Enquirer or similar such rag.
> Finallly - If you want to see what a dishonest scumbag liar Roy Schestowitz > search this newsgroup for "Microsoft Offices Searched for Hookers." > (Interesting title, yes?). Then the Schestowitz scumbag puts this into his > post:
> <quote>
> Federal investigators executed a search warrant at Microsoft's Mountain > View, Calif., offices earlier this month as part of an investigation into a > high-priced call girl ring similar to the one used by former New York Gov. > Eliot Spitzer.
> </quote>
I can't believe he hasn't been sued for slander or libel.
He's too small a fish I suspect.
> It sure sounds pretty damning... unless you read the next paragraph that he > "conveniently" left out.
> <quote>
> The investigator, IRS special agent Anthony Romero, was seeking the > Microsoft Hotmail account records of a woman accused of involvement in a > pricey escort service operating out of Denver, Colo. Records show that > Romero seized from Microsoft more than 3,000 files of "preserved data" from > the account of Kitty_Crim...@hotmail.com.
> Authorities believe that "Kitty Crimson" is actually Heather Bruck, a > Denver-area woman who allegedly worked as a prostitute for an escort service > that went by the names Denver Sugar and Denver Players, according to court > papers.
> No arrests have been made to date in connection with the Denver Sugar/Denver > Players escort ring. There's no indication that Microsoft or any of its > employees are involved with the ring.
> </quote>
Roy loves to leave out minor details such as the above.
Why?
He assumes, and correctly so, that most people will not take the
time to actually vet the article but instead believe what Roy says
as fact.
Since Linux advocates tend to be lazy, this is mostly likely the
case.
> The Roy Schestowitz scumbag twisted the headline into something deliberately > misleading ("Microsoft's Offices Searched for Hookers") then intentionally > posts a small portion of the story in order to imply that Microsoft is being > searched for hookers.
> This is just one of many posts where he shows his dishonesty. Any bad things > said about Schestowitz were earned and are certainly deserving. This is just > one of *many* examples that shows what a dishonest scumbag Roy Schestowitz > is.
That's exactly what Roy Schestowitz is.
He's also a crybaby because it's alright for him to attack someone
but when he gets attacked he cries conspiracy and runs away.
> The Roy Schestowitz scumbag twisted the headline into something deliberately
> misleading ("Microsoft's Offices Searched for Hookers") then intentionally
> posts a small portion of the story in order to imply that Microsoft is being
> searched for hookers.
That's our Spamowitz.
> This is just one of many posts where he shows his dishonesty. Any bad things
> said about Schestowitz were earned and are certainly deserving. This is just
> one of *many* examples that shows what a dishonest scumbag Roy Schestowitz
> is.
Yes.
And then the pile of crap thinks he can blame Microsoft for "hounding Reiser until he murdered his wife".
On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 09:40:58 -0400, DFS wrote:
> On 7/19/2012 8:03 AM, Ezekiel wrote:
>> The Roy Schestowitz scumbag twisted the headline into something deliberately
>> misleading ("Microsoft's Offices Searched for Hookers") then intentionally
>> posts a small portion of the story in order to imply that Microsoft is being
>> searched for hookers.
> That's our Spamowitz.
>> This is just one of many posts where he shows his dishonesty. Any bad things
>> said about Schestowitz were earned and are certainly deserving. This is just
>> one of *many* examples that shows what a dishonest scumbag Roy Schestowitz
>> is.
> Yes.
> And then the pile of crap thinks he can blame Microsoft for "hounding > Reiser until he murdered his wife".
> What a piece of shit.
Truly.
He has done far more damage to Linux than any troll could possibly
imagine.
Take him out of his circle of loons and he is regarded mostly as a
laughing stock.
> >Certainly not what I have been hearing on this ng about Roy.
> #1) It's some article written by an anonymous author calling himself
> "apexwm" - which could be anyone including Roy himself or a personal friend.
> Whoever it was defending Schestowitz they didn't even have the conviction to
> put their name behind it.
> #2) Read some of the comments
I did... prior to posting. One point, this anonymous author was
published on a mainstream site. Doesn't make what he wrote Gospel but
it certainly lends more weight than anyone commenting to his article
unless they credibly source with specificity. In any event, I'm not
giving my opinion on Roy or his detractors other than to point out
that there doesn't appear to be universal consensus he is what many in
COLA claim.
> - such as this one:
> <quote>
> "The articles are very well written and all sources for the articles are
> documented". Let's look at that.
> First, "well written". In fact they are childishly written. He plays dumb
> games with the names. He never talks about iPhone or iPad--they are always
> hypePhone and hypePad.
If true this shows a bias, not a hallmark of good journalism but it's
one that we, unfortunately, see all too often nowadays.
> The BBC is MSBBC. Florien Mueller is "Microsoft
> Florien". And so on and so on. But if anyone calls him "Spamowitz" or "Glen
> Schestowitz" he complains bitterly about how his enemies are attacking him.
One needn't look far to see he's being attacked... I see if often in
this ng. I don't know to what degree he deserves it, that's
subjective... but my point was that not everyone sees it one way and
certainly not the way as seen in COLA.
> Second, "documents". To be documented they need to cite verifiable THIRD
> PARTY sources. His articles do have an impressive number of links in them.
> Most link back to earlier articles of his own.
This doesn't discount the author's suggestion that his articles are
generally sourced well.
> </quote>
> Finallly - If you want to see what a dishonest scumbag liar Roy Schestowitz
> search this newsgroup for "Microsoft Offices Searched for Hookers."
> (Interesting title, yes?). Then the Schestowitz scumbag puts this into his
> post:
I'm from the area in the article (Denver), I vaguely recall this
thread and, upon looking now, I see that he did include the link to
the full article so the suggestion that he "conveniently" left
anything out is a bit silly. If someone provides a link they should
rightfully assume readers will click it, I have no reason to believe
Roy isn't aware of this fact.
> <quote>
> Federal investigators executed a search warrant at Microsoft's Mountain
> View, Calif., offices earlier this month as part of an investigation into a
> high-priced call girl ring similar to the one used by former New York Gov.
> Eliot Spitzer.
> </quote>
> It sure sounds pretty damning... unless you read the next paragraph that he
> "conveniently" left out.
> <quote>
> The investigator, IRS special agent Anthony Romero, was seeking the
> Microsoft Hotmail account records of a woman accused of involvement in a
> pricey escort service operating out of Denver, Colo. Records show that
> Romero seized from Microsoft more than 3,000 files of "preserved data" from
> the account of Kitty_Crim...@hotmail.com.
> Authorities believe that "Kitty Crimson" is actually Heather Bruck, a
> Denver-area woman who allegedly worked as a prostitute for an escort service
> that went by the names Denver Sugar and Denver Players, according to court
> papers.
> No arrests have been made to date in connection with the Denver Sugar/Denver
> Players escort ring. There's no indication that Microsoft or any of its
> employees are involved with the ring.
> </quote>
> The Roy Schestowitz scumbag twisted the headline into something deliberately
> misleading ("Microsoft's Offices Searched for Hookers") then intentionally
> posts a small portion of the story in order to imply that Microsoft is being
> searched for hookers.
The title is slightly misleading, had he written:
'Microsoft's Offices Searched for Evidence of Hookers'
...he'd have been correct. Even so, this title and quoting the first
paragraph on an article (and providing the link for the rest) is not
exactly the hanging offense you're making it out to be ;)
> This is just one of many posts where he shows his dishonesty. Any bad things
> said about Schestowitz were earned and are certainly deserving. This is just
> one of *many* examples that shows what a dishonest scumbag Roy Schestowitz
> is.
If this example is the best you can do I'd say you have a long way to
go to convince people of his "dishonesty". The main point here is
that a usenet post is very different than journalism.
>>> Certainly not what I have been hearing on this ng about Roy.
>> <quote>
>> What I find more interesting though, is that there are posts and other
>> articles written to try and defame or discredit him. And some use some
>> very strong language. Simply doing a Google search for "Roy
>> Schestowitz" comes up with some examples. What in the world is going
>> on here, and why are people trying so hard to discredit him for his
>> articles on techrights.org?
>> </quote>
>> Attempted character defamation seems to be the only ploy the lying
>> trolls posting here have.
> Especially flatfish Gary Stewart and the filthy cretin Hadron Snit Larry are
> doing this on a regular base. Even now, years after Roys last posts to cola,
> these thugs are going after him relentlessly. Seems they don't like being on
> the wrong side
Can you quote a few places where they were wrong? You know, like I do with
you when you belittle me. :)
-- * cc was unable to post a set of data that went back to 2007.
* cc is unable to post an Excel Workbook or otherwise back his claims.
* cc failed to show any sigma depiction I called wrong that was not.
* cc could not list a single step missed in making a linear trend line.
<bbgr...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> On Thursday 19 July 2012 07:35 Peter K hlmann wrote:
>> Especially flatfish Gary Stewart and the filthy cretin Hadron Snit Larry
>> are doing this on a regular base. Even now, years after Roys last posts to
>> cola, these thugs are going after him relentlessly. Seems they don't like
>> being on the wrong side
> Certainly as far as flatfish, DFS, Hadron etc are concerned, I think that
> you are right in the money with that statement, Peter.
> There was distinct change in their postings, and it happened over a
> relatively short period. If I had to put a date to it, I'd say that it was
> at the time that Android started to become popular, and they realised that
> the world was changing.
> - At first, there was a denial that Android was Linux. That died a death
> when the Android code went into the kernel!
Wasn't it the advocates who were making that claim? I could be wrong... not
interested enough to dig up posts... but I seem to recall several of the
"advocates" saying it was not really Linux because it was forked.
> - Then came the realisation that Linux is the ubiquitous OS for everything
> except the desktop.
I think most people are well aware that Linux does very well in embedded
devices, servers, etc. This "realization" is not something recent!
> - Next therefore came a stress on "desktop" whenever statistics were posted.
> That's a bit of a strange one, considering that all the statistics apply to
> web access!
> i.e. Desktops being used for web access aren't actually being used as
> desktops, if you see what I mean. Now consumers are shunning the
> desktop/laptop in favour of tablets and phones, and not Microsoft kit.
Desktops are often used for web access - in fact, one of the big openings
for Linux to truly do well on the desktop is where the desktop is used
mostly as a web kiosk (ChromeOS). For more general desktop usage, however,
Linux does not do well.
> - Finally we have the first signs of the Big Change - flatfish and the "I
> actually like Android"!
And you think that is a bad thing? I think it is good that many people like
Android.
I will say one place *my* views have changed is that I gave Apple / Jobs too
much trust when the claimed that Android was a copy of iOS. Yes, it is
clearly inspired by it and yes, some of the Android devices - such as many
of the ones from Samsung - are clearly rip-offs of Apple devices, but I have
*not* see strong evidence to show Android is ripping off Apple's work as
much as Jobs seemed to think. Given how much Samsung clearly was ripping
off Apple (though even that has reduced from what I can tell), it lead me to
trust Apple / Jobs there more than I should have (though even at my most
"extreme" I was very clear I wanted more evidence to come to a conclusion...
but I was leaning more toward at least largely agreeing with Jobs than I am
now).
So I think you are largely wrong with your above: I believe the "advocates"
were denying Android was Linux as much as anyone else (though, again, I
would have to look through posts to verify this) and I think pretty much
everyone in COLA understands how common and useful Linux is on servers and
embedded devices and the like.
Their are two places where there is major disagreement:
1) On the value of desktop Linux: the "advocates" generally think it is as
good of a solution as is OS X or Windows, even though it is free but hardly
used (1-2% of desktops). The "advocates" tend to blame the "boogieman" (MS
or sometimes Apple) for this. Those of us who are not seen as COLA
"advocates" but are either supportive of other OSs or, such as myself,
supportive of "informed computing" where you try to understand and use the
best solution for any given problem but have no commitment to any given OS,
look and see the inherent weaknesses of the desktop Linux ecosystem and can
offer other explanations why desktop Linux does not gain much popularity.
These reasons include the historical success of Windows (it takes time for
things to change) but also includes the inherent weakness of the mish-mash
approach to making "systems" (inconsistencies and lack of
productivity-enhancing feature) and the lack of top-of-class software (such
as MS Office, Photoshop, Dreamweaver, Electric Quilt, ScreenFlow, and many
more). Where the "advocates" generally focus on one reason and see the
issue as being very black and white (MS evil. Period), those of us who are
not a part of the COLA "advocates" (the herd) view the broader scope and
have a better understanding of the competition. JEDIDIAH and Peter K hlmann
offer excellent examples of "advocates" who do not understand the
competition.
2) Focusing on philosophy vs. focusing on pragmatic value. Many of the
"advocates", esp. Homer, focus on the "value" of things being "Free" as
defined by Stallman (though Homer takes some things even further). While I
and others understand the value of things being open source, we do not
accept the double-talk of Stallman nor place the value of things being open
source above the value of having a productive system. And, even more
importantly, we understand that most people do the same thing. At least in
my case I tend to agree with folks such as Linus Torvalds, Jim Zemlin, and
Mark Shuttleworth (who has specifically talked about this issue of value of
open source vs. being a pragmatically good system). Since I agree with that
"side" of the open source / "Free" debate I am deemed by the "advocates" to
be evil... it is wrong to agree with Torvalds, Zemlin, and Shuttleworth in
their view. I find this absurd... largely agreeing with those three does
*not* make one anti-Linux or anti-open source.
-- * cc was unable to post a set of data that went back to 2007.
* cc is unable to post an Excel Workbook or otherwise back his claims.
* cc failed to show any sigma depiction I called wrong that was not.
* cc could not list a single step missed in making a linear trend line.
Thank you, that is a very nice read. I've seen that article before and it's pretty nice to read it again ;-)
With exclusion of SJVN I have a high opinion about Zdnet, which is too Pro-Microsoft and biased IMO. There for it is fantastic to read a honest and nice article like this.
>> Certainly not what I have been hearing on this ng about Roy.
C.O.L.A has been harassed by lying antisocial creeps (known as "WinTrolls") for years, who would do everything to discredit Free Software Advocates.
Flatfish (the pervert that currently posts under the nyms "Torre Starnes" and "Foster") posted messages under the forgery "Roy Schestowtiz", claiming a sex change and "cut my balls for Linux".
IIRC, Roy received a unpleasant phone call from a worried uncle, asking What on Earth got into "Roy" posting such insane stuff. How LAME is that?
Nobody in this group should *ever* forgive nor forget!
> <quote>
> What I find more interesting though, is that there are posts and other
> articles written to try and defame or discredit him. And some use some
> very strong language. Simply doing a Google search for "Roy
> Schestowitz" comes up with some examples. What in the world is going
> on here, and why are people trying so hard to discredit him for his
> articles on techrights.org?
> </quote>
Oh well "apexwm" is obviously unaware that the nasty hate campaign against Dr. Roy Schestowitz has been going on for ages. The filthy Ad-Hominen attacks have been pre techrights.org and even boycottnovell (the predecessor of techrights.org).
Roy used to outnumber the Anti-Linux and Anti-Free Software garbage, by posting positive GNU/Linux and Free Software articles in C.O.L.A and that's why the desperate Microsoft Munchkins started discrediting him. Roy actually sabotaged their evil master plan :-p
> Attempted character defamation seems to be the only ploy the lying
> trolls posting here have.
Indeed, that's all they have, the poor bastards.
There is a single English word, which describes the Microsoft Munchkins very well: *wicked*
> Thank you, that is a very nice read. I've seen that article before and > it's pretty nice to read it again ;-)
> With exclusion of SJVN I have a high opinion about Zdnet, which is too > Pro-Microsoft and biased IMO. There for it is fantastic to read a honest > and nice article like this.
>>> Certainly not what I have been hearing on this ng about Roy.
> C.O.L.A has been harassed by lying antisocial creeps (known as > "WinTrolls") for years, who would do everything to discredit Free > Software Advocates.
> Flatfish (the pervert that currently posts under the nyms "Torre > Starnes" and "Foster") posted messages under the forgery "Roy > Schestowtiz", claiming a sex change and "cut my balls for Linux".
And don't forget, that psychotic troll is often backup by "Hadron". Which shows just what *he* is.
> IIRC, Roy received a unpleasant phone call from a worried uncle, asking > What on Earth got into "Roy" posting such insane stuff. How LAME is that?
> Nobody in this group should *ever* forgive nor forget!
>> <quote>
>> What I find more interesting though, is that there are posts and other
>> articles written to try and defame or discredit him. And some use some
>> very strong language. Simply doing a Google search for "Roy
>> Schestowitz" comes up with some examples. What in the world is going
>> on here, and why are people trying so hard to discredit him for his
>> articles on techrights.org?
>> </quote>
> Oh well "apexwm" is obviously unaware that the nasty hate campaign > against Dr. Roy Schestowitz has been going on for ages. The filthy > Ad-Hominen attacks have been pre techrights.org and even boycottnovell > (the predecessor of techrights.org).
> Roy used to outnumber the Anti-Linux and Anti-Free Software garbage, by > posting positive GNU/Linux and Free Software articles in C.O.L.A and > that's why the desperate Microsoft Munchkins started discrediting him. > Roy actually sabotaged their evil master plan :-p
>> Attempted character defamation seems to be the only ploy the lying
>> trolls posting here have.
> Indeed, that's all they have, the poor bastards.
> There is a single English word, which describes the Microsoft Munchkins > very well: *wicked*
> Nothing more, nothing less.
Evil?
-- Floppy not responding. Press any key to format HARD DRIVE instead
Really, I'm not out to destroy Microsoft. That will just be a completely unintentional side effect.
-- Linus Torvalds (2003-09-28)
Every time Windows had a rebirth I would get hold of it and buy a new machine to run it on believing that they (M$)
must now have got things right and finally created an operating environment that could excite, impress and enthral me. But each time their system got more ham-fisted, more insulting and more indifferent to the pleasures and interests of the **consumer**.
-- Stephen Fry - December 2008 --
Windows is like a hooker; they're both easy, and using either puts you at risk of viruses.
-- Kelsey Bjarnason --
comp.os.linux.advocacy
Micro$oft, the company that makes spreading malware easy.
> Thank you, that is a very nice read. I've seen that article before and > it's pretty nice to read it again ;-)
> With exclusion of SJVN I have a high opinion about Zdnet, which is too > Pro-Microsoft and biased IMO. There for it is fantastic to read a honest > and nice article like this.
It's so honest that the author doesn't even have the guts to use his
real name.
That's because it's probably one of Roy's shills, like Swapnil, or
possibly even Schestowitz himself.
Instead of reading that shill piece, read the comments to learn what
people really think of Roy.
That's if you can take it Marti.
And we all know you are very good at taking it.
>> Thank you, that is a very nice read. I've seen that article before and
>> it's pretty nice to read it again ;-)
>> With exclusion of SJVN I have a high opinion about Zdnet, which is too
>> Pro-Microsoft and biased IMO. There for it is fantastic to read a honest
>> and nice article like this.
> It's so honest that the author doesn't even have the guts to use his
> real name.
> That's because it's probably one of Roy's shills, like Swapnil, or
> possibly even Schestowitz himself.
> Instead of reading that shill piece, read the comments to learn what
> people really think of Roy.
> That's if you can take it Marti.
> And we all know you are very good at taking it.
Instead of reading what people say about Roy read what Roy writes himself.
He has a website full of propaganda and lies and has made direct lies in
COLA.
Heck, people have noted that Roy no longer posts to COLA. He stopped
shortly after I was on his show and then he made false claims about my
comments. I called him on his false claims but assumed he was merely
mistaken - even defending him when others claimed he was lying. Like many
honest people I am overly trusting - it turned out I was wrong to defend him
and he was in deed lying. He also made all sorts of mistakes in his claims
about desktop Linux. Some of his lies and his errors are documented here:
Those are simply the notes I was making in preparation for being on his show
again... something he had agreed to letting me do but, once he saw my
questions and comments, he pulled out of.
-- * cc was unable to post a set of data that went back to 2007.
* cc is unable to post an Excel Workbook or otherwise back his claims.
* cc failed to show any sigma depiction I called wrong that was not.
* cc could not list a single step missed in making a linear trend line.
>>> Thank you, that is a very nice read. I've seen that article before and
>>> it's pretty nice to read it again ;-)
>>> With exclusion of SJVN I have a high opinion about Zdnet, which is too
>>> Pro-Microsoft and biased IMO. There for it is fantastic to read a honest
>>> and nice article like this.
>> It's so honest that the author doesn't even have the guts to use his
>> real name.
>> That's because it's probably one of Roy's shills, like Swapnil, or
>> possibly even Schestowitz himself.
>> Instead of reading that shill piece, read the comments to learn what
>> people really think of Roy.
>> That's if you can take it Marti.
>> And we all know you are very good at taking it.
> Instead of reading what people say about Roy read what Roy writes himself.
> He has a website full of propaganda and lies and has made direct lies in
> COLA.
Eveyone knows that already.
Few will admit it.
Tell me, how much agreement have *you* gotten exposing his lies?
> Heck, people have noted that Roy no longer posts to COLA. He stopped
> shortly after I was on his show and then he made false claims about my
> comments.
You did good on the show.
You admitted when you didn't have experience with a certain version
of Linux, or something similar and as trivial as that.
He and Goober, who remained silent mostly which is just as bad,
lambasted you behind your back.
> I called him on his false claims but assumed he was merely
> mistaken - even defending him when others claimed he was lying. Like many
> honest people I am overly trusting - it turned out I was wrong to defend him
> and he was in deed lying. He also made all sorts of mistakes in his claims
> about desktop Linux. Some of his lies and his errors are documented here:
> Those are simply the notes I was making in preparation for being on his show
> again... something he had agreed to letting me do but, once he saw my
> questions and comments, he pulled out of.
Why you even bother with those clowns is beyond me.
The deck is stacked against you.
You cannot win, even if you are correct.
And BTW stop falling for Goobers sick, sweet act.
He is just Roy's water boy.
>>> Instead of reading that shill piece, read the comments to learn what
>>> people really think of Roy.
>>> That's if you can take it Marti.
>>> And we all know you are very good at taking it.
>> Instead of reading what people say about Roy read what Roy writes himself.
>> He has a website full of propaganda and lies and has made direct lies in
>> COLA.
> Eveyone knows that already.
> Few will admit it.
> Tell me, how much agreement have *you* gotten exposing his lies?
You are exactly right. It is not as though I did not provide proof - beyond
any doubt - that he was mistaken about his desktop Linux claims and even out
and out lying about his claims about me. The proof is in his own words, the
distros being discussed, and the radio show hosted on his own site.
Additionally, there have been *no* counters offered - only empty denials
where I am told I am wrong but in the absence of any reason or logic or
showing of flaws in my claims.
>> Heck, people have noted that Roy no longer posts to COLA. He stopped
>> shortly after I was on his show and then he made false claims about my
>> comments.
> You did good on the show.
> You admitted when you didn't have experience with a certain version
> of Linux, or something similar and as trivial as that.
Right. I did not have much experience with the then-current PCLOS. I
openly admitted to that. I also admitted I know and use Gnome more than
KDE. There is no shame in this... though my stalker said that this was a
sign I was being "exposed". Um, I "exposed" myself - and it was simply my
being honest. I have no shame in that at all.
In any case, even without my knowing the then-current PCLOS, and Roy
claiming it was a distro he knew well, we each made predictions about how it
would work (and spoke in terms of an older version). I offered, on the
show, to look at these distros and compare the facts of the distros with our
comments on them - and while we *both* had areas where we were wrong, I was
far closer to being correct than was Roy.
This is very telling: Roy claims to use the distro often - I had not used it
(or had barely... I do not recall). And yet I understand the open source
ecosystem well enough where my comments about how it would show itself were
*more* accurate than Roy's.
> He and Goober, who remained silent mostly which is just as bad,
> lambasted you behind your back.
I proved beyond any doubt that, at least in the areas being discussed, I had
a *much* better understanding of the open source ecosystem than did Roy.
This does not mean, of course, that there might not be areas of the open
source world where Roy is more knowledgeable than I am, but it was quite
telling that in the areas we discussed Roy, who is supposedly a Linux
"advocate" and has a web site where he claims to do research, was clearly
less knowledgeable than I who the false COLA "advocates" (the herd) claim is
a "troll" who hates Linux!
They never did explain how and why this could happen... why a "troll" or a
"WinTroll" (who does not really like Windows, but that is besides the
point), would show - on the topics discussed - better knowledge of a
specific older Linux distro and and an overall better understanding of the
relevant parts of the ecosystem that would allow me to show the things I
predicted (and Roy denied) on a distro Roy know and I did not!
>> I called him on his false claims but assumed he was merely mistaken - even
>> defending him when others claimed he was lying. Like many honest people I am
>> overly trusting - it turned out I was wrong to defend him and he was in deed
>> lying. He also made all sorts of mistakes in his claims about desktop Linux.
>> Some of his lies and his errors are documented here:
>> Those are simply the notes I was making in preparation for being on his show
>> again... something he had agreed to letting me do but, once he saw my
>> questions and comments, he pulled out of.
> Why you even bother with those clowns is beyond me.
> The deck is stacked against you.
> You cannot win, even if you are correct.
Depends on how you define "winning". If I required them to be honest for me
to "win" then I would have no chance of "winning", but it does prompt me to
do far more research than I otherwise would do in terms of Linux and open
source topics, which is a huge win for me, and it gives me a chance to
observe an online cult-like group (as well as the actions of some others who
troll), which I find fascinating.
> And BTW stop falling for Goobers sick, sweet act.
> He is just Roy's water boy.
He is clearly politically and emotionally tied to Roy, but I still give him
the benefit of the doubt. As I have noted before, honest people tend to be
too trusting... I admit I am in that group. So be it.
-- * cc was unable to post a set of data that went back to 2007.
* cc is unable to post an Excel Workbook or otherwise back his claims.
* cc failed to show any sigma depiction I called wrong that was not.
* cc could not list a single step missed in making a linear trend line.
> >>> Thank you, that is a very nice read. I've seen that article before and
> >>> it's pretty nice to read it again ;-)
> >>> With exclusion of SJVN I have a high opinion about Zdnet, which is too
> >>> Pro-Microsoft and biased IMO. There for it is fantastic to read a honest
> >>> and nice article like this.
> >> It's so honest that the author doesn't even have the guts to use his
> >> real name.
> >> That's because it's probably one of Roy's shills, like Swapnil, or
> >> possibly even Schestowitz himself.
> >> Instead of reading that shill piece, read the comments to learn what
> >> people really think of Roy.
> >> That's if you can take it Marti.
> >> And we all know you are very good at taking it.
> > Instead of reading what people say about Roy read what Roy writes himself.
> > He has a website full of propaganda and lies and has made direct lies in
> > COLA.
> Eveyone knows that already.
> Few will admit it.
I'd like to see this "website full of propaganda and lies" Snit is
talking about. Sounds more like web pages that Snit has created.
> Tell me, how much agreement have *you* gotten exposing his lies?
ROFL! Unfortunately, for Snit, his reputation precedes him; that's
what happens when you've cried wolf once too often, you lose all
credibility like Snit has. It's a fact that people are loathe to read
what he writes... much less respond to it. That no one agrees with
whatever lies he may have found means nothing. The very idea that it
would is comical ;)
If there are really all these lies people should be able to point to
them. I saw one attempt today that pointed to a news article about MS
and hookers... but it wasn't really dishonest as it was reported.
> > Heck, people have noted that Roy no longer posts to COLA. He stopped
> > shortly after I was on his show and then he made false claims about my
> > comments.
> You did good on the show.
I thought he mostly did OK... I even stated as much on this ng.
> You admitted when you didn't have experience with a certain version
> of Linux, or something similar and as trivial as that.
Well, he also tried to blow a little smoke... to no good effect.
> He and Goober, who remained silent mostly which is just as bad,
> lambasted you behind your back.
I saw some of the stuff Roy said and I don't think it was as big a
deal as Snit made out. I probably didn't see it all, though... and
while I think Roy's comments that I saw were a tad over the top , the
idea behind them wasn't way out of whack. That said, i have seen some
of Roy's biases... as I have Snit's.
> > I called him on his false claims but assumed he was merely
> > mistaken - even defending him when others claimed he was lying. Like many
> > honest people I am overly trusting - it turned out I was wrong to defend him
> > and he was in deed lying. He also made all sorts of mistakes in his claims
> > about desktop Linux. Some of his lies and his errors are documented here:
> > Those are simply the notes I was making in preparation for being on his show
> > again... something he had agreed to letting me do but, once he saw my
> > questions and comments, he pulled out of.
> Why you even bother with those clowns is beyond me.
> The deck is stacked against you.
> You cannot win, even if you are correct.
I disagree. Were he to be honest... and refrain from blowing smoke,
he'll come out honest and that's always a win, regardless of what a
staunch advocate might say to the contrary. Obviously, Snit places
little, to no, value on that, though... which is why he is generally
not believed.
> > You did good on the show.
> > You admitted when you didn't have experience with a certain version
> > of Linux, or something similar and as trivial as that.
> Right. I did not have much experience with the then-current PCLOS. I
> openly admitted to that. I also admitted I know and use Gnome more than
> KDE. There is no shame in this... though my stalker said that this was a
> sign I was being "exposed".
Ah quit yur whinin'.., it's not a dirty word, Snit... you were exposed
on those issues. Big f*cking deal... Roy was exposed as well on the
stuff you brought up.
> Um, I "exposed" myself - and it was simply my
> being honest. I have no shame in that at all.
And no one suggested you should have shame over that, Mr. Whiner. IMO
you shouldn't have tried to blow smoke like you did... but that;s you.
