Why It Was Right To Publish Simon Cooke's Personal Data
Mark S Bilk
<v67ftrs3ckrr.g...@40tude.net>,
Simon Cooke <simon...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>I'm not going to post here any more.
>
>For the past few years, I've always kept a very strict line
>between my employment and my posts to Usenet. My views are
>my own, and I don't see any reason to bring my employer
>into it. It's none of their business, and has no bearing on
>my opinions.
>
>Recently, other posters in this newsgroup - Doug Mentohl
>and Paul Cooke - saw fit to change that. They posted my work
>information here.
>
>Doug Mentohl is now taking this further. He's writing to my
>employers, and is threatening to write to their customers.
Simon Cooke does not deserve any sympathy. Over the years
he has posted many hundreds of lies and insinuationss about
GNU/Linux and its creators. The only possible purpose of his
actions was to deceive people into not trying the software.
Since people come to COLA to learn about GNU/Linux, to help
them decide whether or not to use it, it's entirely possible
that many employers (directly or through their IT people) have
been successfully deceived into avoiding GNU/Linux and staying
with MS-Windows as a result of reading Simon Cooke's lies,
especially when they've also read the lies spread by Microsoft
directly, plus the stories it plants in trade publications.
Cooke's lies would be particularly effective because they appear
to come from an ordinary user. Microsoft has a long history of
this kind of deception, for example:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=352E3B66.9B9C4384%40memra.com
Some of the employers that received Simon Cooke's lies, and
thought as a result that they had no choice but to go on paying
Microsoft's huge license fees, may have therefore had to pay
their workers less, or even lay off some of them, in order to
continue paying the Microsoft tax.
Simon Cooke knew this. He knew that he was harming people,
but he did it eagerly and continued to do it, for years and
many thousands of posts (over 6,700 according to Google).
Harming other people is what we describe as bad, immoral,
unethical, evil, etc. Refraining from harming others is the
sole basis of all sane systems of morality.
Simon Cooke continued to post his lies because he himself
didn't experience any harmful effects from his immoral actions.
Just the opposite -- most likely he was being paid or otherwise
rewarded by Microsoft or its agents for deceiving the public
(the fact that he was working for some other company does not
contradict this in the least). There is really no other motive
that could account for his spending so much time and effort
posting so many lies about GNU/Linux.
Considering the likely harmful results of his anti-Linux smear
campaign, and the fact that he knew full well that these results
would occur, and did it anyhow, it was morally justifiable to
post his personal information, so that he might experience at
least some of the negative consequences that his actions have
probably caused for many other people.
People should not be permitted to harm others anonymously.
Even if they're not punished by the legal system, their evil
actions should be publicized so that others can decide whether
or not to associate with them. Why is Simon Cooke objecting
to people telling his employer what he's been doing? If he'd
been posting the truth on Usenet he'd have nothing to hide, and
his employer would not think ill of him upon receiving letters
describing his actions. He's complaining that his associates
are being told the truth about him, and that his attempts to
hide that truth from his associates have been defeated. And
note that unlike him, those who expose him cannot lie about
his activities, because his posts are all archived by Google,
and accessible by everyone; the evidence is all right there.
Simon Cooke's complaints are as morally absurd as those of a
robber who tries to sue his victim for defamation for yelling,
"Stop thief!"
Robert Foster
(Monday 01 September 2003 15:02) :
<--- explanations snipped --->
Although I agree in part, I'd like to point two things :
a) I don't think that so much people come in here looking for
information about Linux ... there are thousand of better places :-)
b) Even if the negative effects of Simon were as bad as you
described, I don't know if the used method to cut them was correct.
After all, if the arguments were as bad, we could sure easily have
answered him and making him fool.
c) I know I said two :-) Mailing Simon's customers (if true) seems to
me a rather good method.
--
Robert Foster.
Robert Foster
comp.os.linux.advocacy (Monday 01 September 2003 15:18) :
> c) I know I said two :-) Mailing Simon's customers (if true) seems
> to
> me a rather good method.
I meant does not mean me a good method :-)
--
Robert Foster.
ray
I don't agree.
Vipin Bhargava
Beginning with the subject, it is entirely wrong to
post anyone's personal information in Usenet.
Mark S Bilk wrote:
>
>
> Simon Cooke does not deserve any sympathy. Over the years
> he has posted many hundreds of lies and insinuationss about
> GNU/Linux and its creators. The only possible purpose of his
> actions was to deceive people into not trying the software.
For anyone advocating any OS over another, that would be
their only possible purpose. Whether Linux, Windows, AIX,
OS/2, CPM, what other purpose is there in an advocay group?
Oh wait! There is another! Read on.
And if no one refuted any positive Linux posts with negative
Linux posts, what would the group be? A bunch of geeks
patting themselves on the back? Wow, that would be interesting.
>
> Since people come to COLA to learn about GNU/Linux, to help
> them decide whether or not to use it, it's entirely possible
> that many employers (directly or through their IT people) have
> been successfully deceived into avoiding GNU/Linux and staying
> with MS-Windows as a result of reading Simon Cooke's lies,
If anyone decides to not use a product after only reading
an article on the internet, especially after only reading
an article in an .advocacy group, then they have many severe
problems. I doubt they are in a position to make effective
judgement.
> especially when they've also read the lies spread by Microsoft
> directly, plus the stories it plants in trade publications.
SOP in todays world. Lie about your competitor. Most don't
let it get out of hand, though.
> Cooke's lies would be particularly effective because they appear
> to come from an ordinary user. Microsoft has a long history of
> this kind of deception, for example:
>
> http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=352E3B66.9B9C4384%40memra.com
>
Ah, yes, the grassroots campaigning. Been done for a very
long time, MS isn't the first, they certainly won't be the
last.
However, it is wrong to do, I will give you that. The best
way is to find them, and then embarrass them.
> Some of the employers that received Simon Cooke's lies, and
> thought as a result that they had no choice but to go on paying
> Microsoft's huge license fees, may have therefore had to pay
> their workers less, or even lay off some of them, in order to
> continue paying the Microsoft tax.
Ok, now you're stretching. Once again, a post in Usenet
hardly qualifies as a reasonable opinion on any product.
I don't want to work for any company that makes its decisions
based on .advocacy groups.
>
> Simon Cooke knew this. He knew that he was harming people,
> but he did it eagerly and continued to do it, for years and
> many thousands of posts (over 6,700 according to Google).
Number of posts is irrelevant. If Simon Cooke is to be
believed, he did it for fun. As many others are here for
as well. It's amusing. I'm here looking for SCO info, myself.
>
> Harming other people is what we describe as bad, immoral,
> unethical, evil, etc. Refraining from harming others is the
> sole basis of all sane systems of morality.
Harming? He beat someone up?
>
> Simon Cooke continued to post his lies because he himself
> didn't experience any harmful effects from his immoral actions.
> Just the opposite -- most likely he was being paid or otherwise
> rewarded by Microsoft or its agents for deceiving the public
> (the fact that he was working for some other company does not
> contradict this in the least). There is really no other motive
> that could account for his spending so much time and effort
> posting so many lies about GNU/Linux.
Irrelevant who pays him for what. If MS wants to pay someone
to piss off a bunch of geeks like us, let them. They have
to put that $50 billion somewhere. :-)
>
> Considering the likely harmful results of his anti-Linux smear
> campaign, and the fact that he knew full well that these results
> would occur, and did it anyhow, it was morally justifiable to
> post his personal information, so that he might experience at
> least some of the negative consequences that his actions have
> probably caused for many other people.
Nope. It's the ones who make decisions based on c.o.l.a
articles that should be posted here. I need a good laugh.
No matter how you try to justify it, you haven't shown he
has a lack of morals. In fact, if the above is all there is,
I question the morals of the person who posted the info.
I haven't seen the info, nor do I want to. Further, my
current understanding is that the person who posted the
info did it anonymously. Yup, that's standing for your
convictions. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
>
> People should not be permitted to harm others anonymously.
> Even if they're not punished by the legal system, their evil
> actions should be publicized so that others can decide whether
> or not to associate with them.
What harm, what evil actions? Calling someone names on the
internet? Somehow I think he's in that group that will say
things on the internet he wouldn't say in person. And I'm
sure there are many many many others like him around here.
> Why is Simon Cooke objecting
> to people telling his employer what he's been doing? If he'd
> been posting the truth on Usenet he'd have nothing to hide, and
> his employer would not think ill of him upon receiving letters
> describing his actions.
Because it's personal info. His info. Info that need not be
shared. Doesn't matter what his employer thinks, his employer
should not be involved at all.
> He's complaining that his associates
> are being told the truth about him, and that his attempts to
> hide that truth from his associates have been defeated. And
> note that unlike him, those who expose him cannot lie about
> his activities, because his posts are all archived by Google,
> and accessible by everyone; the evidence is all right there.
>
> Simon Cooke's complaints are as morally absurd as those of a
> robber who tries to sue his victim for defamation for yelling,
> "Stop thief!"
>
So what? He calls people names, they call him names back.
That fits right in with another post about what this group
is all about. Here's the real purspose of this .advocacy
group:
It's to call people names, and have them call you names
right back.
If you truly believe there's more to it than that, then you
really need to sit back, realize there's an outside, open
the window, let some fresh air in, realize there's more
fresh air out there, shower, shave, and head on out.
No, really. I suggest you do it.
Vip
Sinister Midget
No way does any of that justify writing directly to the employer and/or
threatening to contact customers of the employer. Simon is an awful
human, but that doesn't make that type of action justified. Ever!
A better method would have been humiliation. Now it's too late to
employ that feature.
Simon, if you're reading this, I want you to know that I want you to go
away, no doubt about it. But I still see that type of thing as an
asshole's out.
If you thought you ever had a valid reason to sue someone in the past
based on the things I've seen you threaten about, you were wrong. In
this case I think you might have solid ground to stand on. I'd even
offer to help you track it down if I thought I could add anything.
--
Exxon sponsored ecology videos, Kraft sponsored nutrition videos...
I'd be surprised if Microsoft isn't sponsoring technology classes.
Daeron
<snip>
> No way does any of that justify writing directly to the employer
> and/or threatening to contact customers of the employer. Simon is an
> awful human, but that doesn't make that type of action justified.
> Ever!
Sinister: while you do have my commiserations in regard to the abuse
heaped on you by Simon. I am not using this as a pretext to have a go at
simon. My motives are purly personal. See my past exchanges with
trollboy for the reasons.
I did warn him. I find his abuse offensive whoever they are
directed at. Let me reiterate I am very pissed off with trollboy. The
recent exchange with you was the last straw. This is him basically
pissing all over COLA.
> A better method would have been humiliation. Now it's too late to
> employ that feature.
been there done that got the t-shit
> Simon, if you're reading this, I want you to know that I want you to
> go away, no doubt about it. But I still see that type of thing as an
> asshole's out.
> If you thought you ever had a valid reason to sue someone in the past
> based on the things I've seen you threaten about, you were wrong. In
> this case I think you might have solid ground to stand on. I'd even
> offer to help you track it down if I thought I could add anything.
If I ever catch up with trollboy he's going to need more than a lawyer.
I make my statements solely on my own behalf. Simon got my attention a
long time ago.
Terry
and this is what they wrote:
> On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 22:10:22 GMT, in
><v67ftrs3ckrr.g...@40tude.net>,
> Simon Cooke <simon...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>I'm not going to post here any more.
>>
>>For the past few years, I've always kept a very strict line
>>between my employment and my posts to Usenet. My views are
>>my own, and I don't see any reason to bring my employer
>>into it. It's none of their business, and has no bearing on
>>my opinions.
>>
>>Recently, other posters in this newsgroup - Doug Mentohl
>>and Paul Cooke - saw fit to change that. They posted my work
>>information here.
>>
>>Doug Mentohl is now taking this further. He's writing to my
>>employers, and is threatening to write to their customers.
>
> Simon Cooke does not deserve any sympathy. Over the years
> he has posted many hundreds of lies and insinuationss about
> GNU/Linux and its creators. The only possible purpose of his
> actions was to deceive people into not trying the software.
<deletia>
Agree with your analysis (as usual).
Hi Mark :)
--
Kind Regards from Terry
My Desktop is powered by GNU/LinuX, Gentoo-1.4_rc2
New Homepage: http://milkstone.d2.net.au/
** Linux Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
Donn Miller
> On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 22:10:22 GMT, in
> <v67ftrs3ckrr.g...@40tude.net>,
> Simon Cooke <simon...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>>I'm not going to post here any more.
>>
>>For the past few years, I've always kept a very strict line
>>between my employment and my posts to Usenet. My views are
>>my own, and I don't see any reason to bring my employer
>>into it. It's none of their business, and has no bearing on
>>my opinions.
>>
>>Recently, other posters in this newsgroup - Doug Mentohl
>>and Paul Cooke - saw fit to change that. They posted my work
>>information here.
>>
>>Doug Mentohl is now taking this further. He's writing to my
>>employers, and is threatening to write to their customers.
>
>
> Simon Cooke does not deserve any sympathy. Over the years
> he has posted many hundreds of lies and insinuationss about
> GNU/Linux and its creators. The only possible purpose of his
> actions was to deceive people into not trying the software.
>
> Since people come to COLA to learn about GNU/Linux, to help
> them decide whether or not to use it, it's entirely possible
> that many employers (directly or through their IT people) have
> been successfully deceived into avoiding GNU/Linux and staying
> with MS-Windows as a result of reading Simon Cooke's lies,
What?! I suggest you do some investigations on Google. Fact: COLA was
founded because some imbeciles were clogging up c.o.l.* with all kinds
of advocacy crap. Thus, COLA was created get those people out of there.
It's a place where people can advocate Linux, and talk about pretty
much anything, really, but the goal is to get the off-topic garbage out
of the rest of c.o.l.*. You can talk about charters, etc., and some
people have made c.o.l.a out to serve a much loftier purpose that it
really does. That doesn't change the fact, and the absolute,
bottom-line fact that COLA was created to divert the garbage, advocates,
kooks, flamers, and weirdos out of c.o.l.* so people who want to find
out about Linux can do so without wading through tons of crap.
Besides, and I can't believe people in here can't read, but according to
Simon's employers' web site, he doesn't work for Microsoft. It clearly
shows that. Besides, Simon's got a job to do. He's got bills to pay,
and he's not doing anything other than stating his (albeit negative)
opinions about Linux, GNU, whatever in a group whose very purpose is to
keep the shit out of the rest of c.o.l.* in the first fucking place.
But given all the above, that still doesn't mean that some meaningful
advocacy can't take place here. If you don't like the guy, killfile
him, or worse yet, report him to his ISP. But don't ever do anything to
take away his right to earn a living.
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
manfrommars_43
> But given all the above, that still doesn't mean that some meaningful
> advocacy can't take place here. If you don't like the guy, killfile
> him, or worse yet, report him to his ISP. But don't ever do anything to
> take away his right to earn a living.
there was this guy at Boeing
named Kal K. Korf ( I'm not
making this up ) who was some
type of IT architect BUT he
was also a leading UFO debunker.
He published books and generally
debated the large and vociferous
'believer' community. He mixed
a public 'soapbox' with a private
'profession'. For some reason,
I had the feeling that Boeing
was pleased with both aspects
of his work. Perhaps the
'ion analyzer' people feel the same.
Obviously the man is somewhat
of a public figure to begin with.
Why he chooses usenet to write
in I'll never know. But I guess,
these ex-officio attacks can both
hurt and help. I mean, suppose
you write to one of his customers
and say 'Simon Cooke' is a rabid
winTroll, and his customers are
big fans of Microsoft! They might
say, "ion analyzer! I'll take a
dozen"!
--
http://home.earthlink.net/~jabailo
finders storyTeller
Mr. Berserker
> > Simon Cooke does not deserve any sympathy. Over the years
> > he has posted many hundreds of lies and insinuationss about
> > GNU/Linux and its creators. The only possible purpose of his
> > actions was to deceive people into not trying the software.
>
> <deletia>
>
> Agree with your analysis (as usual).
I disagree with Mark Bilk. Though I may slam trolls, I have become
merciful over the years. "Let the one among you who is without sin
cast the first stone." After all, when Frodo Baggins and Samwise
Gamgee pitied Gollum, he eventually ended up destroying the One Ring.
Is Gollum as bad as $COoke; who knows? :)
Seriously, I think it was extreme to destroy Kooke.
>
> Hi Mark :)
Peter Köhlmann
I'm not that sure. I think it was he himself who destroyed him
To make that perfectly clear, I *never* would endorse going after him by
destroying his professional career. But he, on the other side, wasn't
below that either. He wanted the employer, address etc from those who
slammed him hardest, me included, although I never said anything postive
about showing his details. And I am very sure of it, this pig would have
tried to use it against those people. He could not have harmed me,
although he doesn't know it, even when he tried all the tricks a swine
like him might come up with. That does not change the fact in the
slightest that he was trying to go after those who told him exactly and
in no kind words what they thought of him
But in the work world, where he earns a living, the people should be able
to look after them theirselves, they are certainly not dafter then we
here on cola. They would throw him out immedeately if he would show off
just a slight little bit like he did here
--
"Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend: and inside a dog,
it's too dark to read." -- Groucho Marx
Mark
Donn Miller <dmmi...@cvzoom.net> wrote:
>What?! I suggest you do some investigations on Google. Fact: COLA was
>founded because some imbeciles were clogging up c.o.l.* with all kinds
>of advocacy crap. Thus, COLA was created get those people out of there.
> It's a place where people can advocate Linux, and talk about pretty
>much anything, really, but the goal is to get the off-topic garbage out
>of the rest of c.o.l.*. You can talk about charters, etc., and some
>people have made c.o.l.a out to serve a much loftier purpose that it
>really does. That doesn't change the fact, and the absolute,
>bottom-line fact that COLA was created to divert the garbage, advocates,
>kooks, flamers, and weirdos out of c.o.l.* so people who want to find
>out about Linux can do so without wading through tons of crap.
Finally, someone who has an idea of what cola is for.
Mark
ma...@cosmicpenguin.com (Mark S Bilk) wrote:
>[Bullshit snipped]
No matter how you try to justify it, posting someone's private
information on usenet or supporting it, shows that you are a low life
scumbag, and I hope someone does the same for you resulting in you
getting in real trouble so that you learn a valuable lesson.
Also if you think that anyone looks in an advocacy news group to
determine whether to hire someone or to continue hiring him, makes look
even more stupid than what you already are.
manfrommars_43
> Also if you think that anyone looks in an advocacy news group to
> determine whether to hire someone or to continue hiring him, makes look
> even more stupid than what you already are.
au contraire.
my boss did a google search on me
( including a google.groups search )
to verify various claims I made in
my resume ( for example, he saw that
I had indeed done a TDD project for
microsoft in '90 because of posts
about the project ).
who
> In article <mrH4b.321511$o%2.145945@sccrnsc02>
> ma...@cosmicpenguin.com (Mark S Bilk) wrote:
>
>>[Bullshit snipped]
>
> No matter how you try to justify it, posting someone's private
> information on usenet or supporting it, shows that you are a low life
> scumbag,
and/or, misguided/a stalker/someone whose fuse has blown - or their bulb
element has broken.
> and I hope someone does the same for you resulting in you
> getting in real trouble so that you learn a valuable lesson.
That's dangerously close to lowering yourself to their level.
> Also if you think that anyone looks in an advocacy news group to
> determine whether to hire someone or to continue hiring him, makes look
> even more stupid than what you already are.
Never really given the thought any consideration, to be honest.
Anyone want to employ me? Drop me a line, seriously. I live in Manchester, UK.
Mostly in agreement with you over the disclosing of personal details being way
out of order.
Darren
--
kNode 0.7.2 (under KDE3.1.0) | Slackware 9.0
Athlon XP2100+ | Nvidia GeForce4 Ti4200 8x
ASUS A7V333 | Spare Seagate | 512Mb RAM
Gnu/Linux - It /just/ works and /it/ /works/ *fast*
Mark S Bilk
>Mark S Bilk threw some tea leaves on the floor
> and this is what they wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 22:10:22 GMT, in
>><v67ftrs3ckrr.g...@40tude.net>,
>> Simon Cooke <simon...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>Recently, other posters in this newsgroup - Doug Mentohl
>>>and Paul Cooke - saw fit to change that. They posted my work
>>>information here.
>>>
>>>Doug Mentohl is now taking this further. He's writing to my
>>>employers, and is threatening to write to their customers.
>>
>> Simon Cooke does not deserve any sympathy. Over the years
>> he has posted many hundreds of lies and insinuationss about
>> GNU/Linux and its creators. The only possible purpose of his
>> actions was to deceive people into not trying the software.
>
><deletia>
>
>Agree with your analysis (as usual).
Thanks!
>Hi Mark :)
Hi Terry!
Glad to see you back! There was some concern that you might
have been eaten by a pack of wild dingos while motorcycling
around Ayers Rock. 8^)
T.G. Reaper
> Mark:
>
>> Also if you think that anyone looks in an advocacy news group to
>> determine whether to hire someone or to continue hiring him, makes look
>> even more stupid than what you already are.
>
> au contraire.
>
> my boss did a google search on me
ROTFL - That proves his point.
Only someone stupid enough to verify clams via usenet posts would be
incompetent enough to hire the likes of you.
--
http://www.zone-h.org/ Hall Of Shame Report for: Mon Sep 1 16:09:01 2003
_____________________________________________________________________________
76.3 % of the Defaced systems were running Linux
7.9 % of the Defaced systems were running Windows 2000
5.3 % of the Defaced systems were running Sun/Solaris
2.6 % of the Defaced systems were running FreeBSD
2.6 % of the Defaced systems were running Irix
_____________________________________________________________________________
** 470 Attacks On Hold ** 13 Single IP Attacks ** 25 Mass Defacements **
Sinister Midget
Several of those groups to which I proudly belong!
> Besides, and I can't believe people in here can't read, but according to
> Simon's employers' web site, he doesn't work for Microsoft. It clearly
> shows that. Besides, Simon's got a job to do. He's got bills to pay,
> and he's not doing anything other than stating his (albeit negative)
> opinions about Linux, GNU, whatever in a group whose very purpose is to
> keep the shit out of the rest of c.o.l.* in the first fucking place.
That wasn't my problem with him. He was welcome to do that. It *did*
bug me that he felt the need to FUD everything possible. And I felt the
need to taunt him because of it. He stepped over the line because of
it. I may be responsible for giving him the ammo, but he had to pull
the trigger to make the thing shoot.
Despite that, he didn't deserve the comments to $EMPLOYER about it all.
A few weeks back I was given grief by my ISP. Someone gathered together
bits and pieces of various people. I don't recall them all, but they
used cybear's "From" line and my "Posting Host" line. It was something
to do with Nazis. Someone reported me to the ISP for comments I didn't
make. I *did* make a comment in the thread, mentioning the twisting of
several identities together. That's it. I had to prove I wasn't the
culprit by using the headers (something those MICROS~1-using monkeys at
roadrunner still can't do without assistnace).
That was a royal PITA, especially for something I didn't do. What was
done to Simon was far worse. All of the justification on earth isn't
cause to do something like that.
To make matters worse, the complaint against Simon was based completely
on innaccurate "facts".
> But given all the above, that still doesn't mean that some meaningful
> advocacy can't take place here. If you don't like the guy, killfile
> him, or worse yet, report him to his ISP. But don't ever do anything to
> take away his right to earn a living.
That's why I divorce myself from any of that, and I don't even like my
name (fake as it is) associated with it. He was worthless as a human
being IN MY OPINION. But that doesn't warrant what was done to him.
--
XP: The ME of NT.
Mark S Bilk
Vipin Bhargava <vipin@shaw_remove_this_.ca> wrote:
>Sorry, Mark, I disagree with much of your post.
>Beginning with the subject, it is entirely wrong to
>post anyone's personal information in Usenet.
>
>Mark S Bilk wrote:
>> Simon Cooke does not deserve any sympathy. Over the years
>> he has posted many hundreds of lies and insinuationss about
>> GNU/Linux and its creators. The only possible purpose of his
>> actions was to deceive people into not trying the software.
>
>For anyone advocating any OS over another, that would be
>their only possible purpose. Whether Linux, Windows, AIX,
>OS/2, CPM, what other purpose is there in an advocay group?
No, the purpose of advocating an OS _truthfully_ is to give
people the accurate information they need for deciding whether
or not to try it. That is not at all _deceiving_ them!
Bhargava's statement implies that he believes falsehoods and
truths, and also educating and deceiving, are equivalent.
That is factually and morally absurd.
>And if no one refuted any positive Linux posts with negative
>Linux posts, what would the group be? A bunch of geeks
>patting themselves on the back? Wow, that would be interesting.
Here Bhargava equates the many hundreds of lies posted by
Simon Cooke with "negative Linux posts", as if Cooke merely
wrote that he personally didn't prefer Linux. That's not what
he did that justifies breaching his anonymity; he purposely
_lied_ about the facts of GNU/Linux and its creators many
hundreds (or thousands) of times. He did it intentionally in
order to misinform visitors to COLA.
>> Since people come to COLA to learn about GNU/Linux, to help
>> them decide whether or not to use it, it's entirely possible
>> that many employers (directly or through their IT people) have
>> been successfully deceived into avoiding GNU/Linux and staying
>> with MS-Windows as a result of reading Simon Cooke's lies,
>
>If anyone decides to not use a product after only reading
>an article on the internet, especially after only reading
>an article in an .advocacy group, then they have many severe
>problems. I doubt they are in a position to make effective
>judgement.
>
>> especially when they've also read the lies spread by Microsoft
>> directly, plus the stories it plants in trade publications.
>
>SOP in todays world. Lie about your competitor. Most don't
>let it get out of hand, though.
Bhargava has separated two parts of a sentence that need to be
read together. The point is that people are much more likely to
believe something if they hear it from multiple sources. That's
why Microsoft broadcasts its anti-Linux lies by at least three
routes: 1. overtly, in its own advertising and position papers,
2. by inducing dishonest journalists to include them in their
columns and stories, and 3. by paying individuals to write
letters that appear to be from "grassroots" people (in this
case, individual unaffiliated users). (False grassroots
messages are called "astroturf"; they are widely used by greedy
businessmen against, e.g., environmentalists.)
So although a particular person might not be deceived into
rejecting GNU/Linux solely as a result of reading Simon Cooke's
lies, or solely from reading lies from Microsoft directly or
via columnists, they may very well be successfully deceived by
the lies from two or three of these routes acting together.
Therefore Cooke bears moral responsibility for the harm done to
the people who have been thus deceived (as does Microsoft itself,
of course.)
>> Cooke's lies would be particularly effective because they appear
>> to come from an ordinary user. Microsoft has a long history of
>> this kind of deception, for example:
>>
>> http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=352E3B66.9B9C4384%40memra.com
>
>Ah, yes, the grassroots campaigning. Been done for a very
>long time, MS isn't the first, they certainly won't be the last.
>However, it is wrong to do, I will give you that. The best
>way is to find them, and then embarrass them.
Well, this is exactly what was accomplished by publishing the
name of his employer. Cooke was exposed and embarrassed many
times on Usenet alone, but it did not motivate him to stop
posting his lies.
>> Some of the employers that received Simon Cooke's lies, and
>> thought as a result that they had no choice but to go on paying
>> Microsoft's huge license fees, may have therefore had to pay
>> their workers less, or even lay off some of them, in order to
>> continue paying the Microsoft tax.
>
>Ok, now you're stretching. Once again, a post in Usenet
>hardly qualifies as a reasonable opinion on any product.
>I don't want to work for any company that makes its decisions
>based on .advocacy groups.
A post in Usenet is no more or less valid than a message in any
other forum. People usually try to evaluate whether a message
they receive by any route is true or false, but clever falsehoods,
especially when delivered through several routes simultaneously,
often succeed in deceiving them.
>> Simon Cooke knew this. He knew that he was harming people,
>> but he did it eagerly and continued to do it, for years and
>> many thousands of posts (over 6,700 according to Google).
>
>Number of posts is irrelevant. If Simon Cooke is to be
>believed, he did it for fun. As many others are here for
>as well. It's amusing. I'm here looking for SCO info, myself.
Having posted many hundreds of messages containing provable
lies, Simon Cooke is of course _not_ to be believed.
>> Harming other people is what we describe as bad, immoral,
>> unethical, evil, etc. Refraining from harming others is the
>> sole basis of all sane systems of morality.
>
>Harming? He beat someone up?
Bhargava has forgotten the paragraph he quoted above:
>> Some of the employers that received Simon Cooke's lies, and
>> thought as a result that they had no choice but to go on paying
>> Microsoft's huge license fees, may have therefore had to pay
>> their workers less, or even lay off some of them, in order to
>> continue paying the Microsoft tax.
>> Simon Cooke continued to post his lies because he himself
>> didn't experience any harmful effects from his immoral actions.
>> Just the opposite -- most likely he was being paid or otherwise
>> rewarded by Microsoft or its agents for deceiving the public
>> (the fact that he was working for some other company does not
>> contradict this in the least). There is really no other motive
>> that could account for his spending so much time and effort
>> posting so many lies about GNU/Linux.
>
>Irrelevant who pays him for what. If MS wants to pay someone
>to piss off a bunch of geeks like us, let them. They have
>to put that $50 billion somewhere. :-)
That's not why they pay them. They do it to deceive people who
visit COLA looking for information about GNU/Linux. Every person
they deceive means big money continuing to flow to Microsoft.
>> Considering the likely harmful results of his anti-Linux smear
>> campaign, and the fact that he knew full well that these results
>> would occur, and did it anyhow, it was morally justifiable to
>> post his personal information, so that he might experience at
>> least some of the negative consequences that his actions have
>> probably caused for many other people.
>
>Nope. It's the ones who make decisions based on c.o.l.a
>articles that should be posted here. I need a good laugh.
Bhargava again ignores the synergistic effect of Simon Cooke's
lies that was explained in the original post.
>No matter how you try to justify it, you haven't shown he
>has a lack of morals. In fact, if the above is all there is,
>I question the morals of the person who posted the info.
Bhargava evaded the moral analysis in the original post. His
evasions have been corrected here.
>I haven't seen the info, nor do I want to. Further, my
>current understanding is that the person who posted the
>info did it anonymously. Yup, that's standing for your
>convictions. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
The person who posted the information may not have the money
to defend himself against a fraudulent lawsuit brought by
Simon Cooke. Unfortunately, in our legal system a person
who merely tells the truth may still have to spend a lot of
money on lawyers.
>> People should not be permitted to harm others anonymously.
>> Even if they're not punished by the legal system, their evil
>> actions should be publicized so that others can decide whether
>> or not to associate with them.
>
>What harm, what evil actions? Calling someone names on the
>internet? Somehow I think he's in that group that will say
>things on the internet he wouldn't say in person. And I'm
>sure there are many many many others like him around here.
Again Bhargava ignores the clear proof given for the harm done
by Simon Cooke.
>> Why is Simon Cooke objecting
>> to people telling his employer what he's been doing? If he'd
>> been posting the truth on Usenet he'd have nothing to hide, and
>> his employer would not think ill of him upon receiving letters
>> describing his actions.
>
>Because it's personal info. His info. Info that need not be
>shared. Doesn't matter what his employer thinks, his employer
>should not be involved at all.
Actually, since Simon Cooke has been involved in a project of
continuous fraud and deception for several years, which means
he is quite willing to harm others in order to benefit himself,
it's certainly possible that he might have been defrauding and
deceiving his employer as well. If this is the case, anyone
who knows of Cooke's Usenet activities and the identity of his
employer, and does _not_ inform the employer of the facts, is
morally guilty of aiding and abetting.
>> He's complaining that his associates
>> are being told the truth about him, and that his attempts to
>> hide that truth from his associates have been defeated. And
>> note that unlike him, those who expose him cannot lie about
>> his activities, because his posts are all archived by Google,
>> and accessible by everyone; the evidence is all right there.
>>
>> Simon Cooke's complaints are as morally absurd as those of a
>> robber who tries to sue his victim for defamation for yelling,
>> "Stop thief!"
>So what? He calls people names, they call him names back.
>That fits right in with another post about what this group
>is all about. Here's the real purspose of this .advocacy
>group:
>
>It's to call people names, and have them call you names
>right back.
Yet again, Bhargava evades the fact that Simon Cooke has posted
many hundreds of lies against GNU/Linux, with the intentional
purpose of deceiving people into not using it. This is far more
harmful than merely "calling people names".
Mark S Bilk
Wrong. The newsgroup comp.os.linux.advocacy was created in 1994.
Its Charter is: "For discussion of the benefits of Linux
compared to other operating systems."
Here are the steps in the creation of comp.os.linux.advocacy;
each of these official posts cites that charter:
Request For Discussion:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=37mn57%24dhs%40rodan.UU.NET
Call For Votes:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=comp.os.linux-reorg3-CFV2%40uunet.uu.net
Voting Results -- passed 1337 to 167:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=comp.os.linux-reorg3-RESULT1%40uunet.uu.net
>You can talk about charters, etc., and some
>people have made c.o.l.a out to serve a much loftier purpose that it
>really does. That doesn't change the fact, and the absolute,
>bottom-line fact that COLA was created to divert the garbage, advocates,
>kooks, flamers, and weirdos out of c.o.l.* so people who want to find
>out about Linux can do so without wading through tons of crap.
There is no evidence to support this allegation in any of the
articles whose Google URLs are given above. The fundamental
rule of Usenet is that posts in each newsgroup are restricted
to those specified by its charter.
Donn Miller is free to call for the creation of
comp.os.linux.garbage-flamers-liars with an appropriate
charter if he wishes, but I guarantee that the perpetrators of
Microsoft's lying smear campaign against GNU/Linux will not
move there.
>Besides, and I can't believe people in here can't read, but according to
>Simon's employers' web site, he doesn't work for Microsoft. It clearly
>shows that.
That doesn't prevent him from getting paid by Microsoft or its
agents as well.
>Besides, Simon's got a job to do. He's got bills to pay,
>and he's not doing anything other than stating his (albeit negative)
>opinions about Linux, GNU,
No, he has been posting many hundreds of distortions and outright
lies, purposely in order to deceive people into not using
GNU/Linux.
>whatever in a group whose very purpose is to
>keep the shit out of the rest of c.o.l.* in the first fucking place.
No, according to the rules of Usenet, the purpose of a newsgroup
is for posting messages specified by the newsgroup's charter.
>But given all the above, that still doesn't mean that some meaningful
>advocacy can't take place here. If you don't like the guy, killfile
>him, or worse yet, report him to his ISP. But don't ever do anything to
>take away his right to earn a living.
But that is exactly the probable effect of his lies on other
people. Quoting from the original post:
Since people come to COLA to learn about GNU/Linux, to help
them decide whether or not to use it, it's entirely possible
that many employers (directly or through their IT people) have
been successfully deceived into avoiding GNU/Linux and staying
with MS-Windows, as a result of reading Simon Cooke's lies,
Terry
and this is what they wrote:
><snip>
>
>> > Simon Cooke does not deserve any sympathy. Over the years
>> > he has posted many hundreds of lies and insinuationss about
>> > GNU/Linux and its creators. The only possible purpose of his
>> > actions was to deceive people into not trying the software.
>>
>> <deletia>
>>
>> Agree with your analysis (as usual).
>
> I disagree with Mark Bilk.
And I agree. His analysis over the years I have been here, has been
right to the best of my recollection.
> Though I may slam trolls, I have become
> merciful over the years.
Sadly the Wintrolls haven't had the same change of heart.
> "Let the one among you who is without sin
> cast the first stone."
Too religious for me.
> After all, when Frodo Baggins and Samwise
> Gamgee pitied Gollum, he eventually ended up destroying the One Ring.
Only because after he had bitten of Frodo's finger to steal the ring
away from him, Gollum fell into Mt Doom by accident.
> Is Gollum as bad as $COoke; who knows? :)
Gollums heart was black from years of association with the ring, he
wasn't stupid.
>
> Seriously, I think it was extreme to destroy Kooke.
He's not destroyed. Simon thought nothing of posting personal phone
numbers of his opposition on line and someone (not me, I'm not an
anonymous coward) posted his details on line.
Tough.
He got as good as he gave, and that's ok by me.
Simon has flounced off, but you can be sure he will be back, it's a
little early to begin whipping yourself over him.
Terry
and this is what they wrote:
You have been listening to the Wintrolls (thats Eric Funkenbuschs
*same* argument) too long Donn.
If you had bothered to do the research you are advocating you would
have found this:-
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=comp.os.linux.advocacy
-RFD1%40uunet.uu.net&output=gplain
"Recently on comp.os.linux.misc, there have been many debates of Linux
versus DOS, Windows, NeXTstep, and other operating systems. There have
been postings requesting that those discussions move to a
comp.os.linux.advocacy group. The creation of this group would leave
Linux-only and technical questions in the existing comp.os.linux.misc
and comp.os.linux.development groups, and move all inter-operating
system (and platform) discussions to this proposed group."
...............................
Please note that nowhere does the RFD mention that cola be used for anything
*other* than GNU/Linux advocacy.
Cola is not a home for Wintroll posters.
Terry
and this is what they wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Sep 2003 04:28:54 +1000, Terry <tjpo...@gronk.porter.net> wrote:
>>Mark S Bilk threw some tea leaves on the floor
>> and this is what they wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 22:10:22 GMT, in
>>><v67ftrs3ckrr.g...@40tude.net>,
>>> Simon Cooke <simon...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>>Recently, other posters in this newsgroup - Doug Mentohl
>>>>and Paul Cooke - saw fit to change that. They posted my work
>>>>information here.
>>>>
>>>>Doug Mentohl is now taking this further. He's writing to my
>>>>employers, and is threatening to write to their customers.
>>>
>>> Simon Cooke does not deserve any sympathy. Over the years
>>> he has posted many hundreds of lies and insinuationss about
>>> GNU/Linux and its creators. The only possible purpose of his
>>> actions was to deceive people into not trying the software.
>>
>><deletia>
>>
>>Agree with your analysis (as usual).
>
> Thanks!
>
>>Hi Mark :)
>
> Hi Terry!
>
> Glad to see you back!
Thanks.
>There was some concern that you might
> have been eaten by a pack of wild dingos while motorcycling
> around Ayers Rock. 8^)
Hah, I rode around OZ during the heat of summer and during a
drought (bad idea), the Dingoes were too busy panting under the shade
of what trees there were about, and dreaming of a drink of water to
bother me :)
The Wintrolls were busy forging me in my absence, posting claims that I
"had gone back to Windows".
How does forging another person rack up on the list of low acts ?
Pretty low I'd say, and I hope that the advocates here keep those
things in mind when considering leniency for Wintrolls.
Terry
and this is what they wrote:
> In article <mrH4b.321511$o%2.145945@sccrnsc02>
> ma...@cosmicpenguin.com (Mark S Bilk) wrote:
>
>>[Bullshit snipped]
>
> No matter how you try to justify it, posting someone's private
> information on usenet
...............................
From: Simon Cooke (simon...@eaSPAMMAGErthNOSPAMlink.net)
Subject: Re: Ion Analyzer Crashes... LoseDos 1903 bug?
This is the only article in this thread
View: Original Format
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Date: 2003-08-01 20:19:36 PST
On Sat, 02 Aug 2003 03:31:58 GMT, john bailo wrote:
> On Fri, 01 Aug 2003 23:24:10 +0000, Simon Cooke wrote:
>
>>go. But of course, some people (like Darren) won't let it lie.
>>
>> Simon
>
> Seattle, Wa
>
> Reuters
>
> Ion Analyzer develops major defect due to bugs in LoseDOS 2003
>
> Seems that they have been evaluating criminal DNA as belonging to
> the late great Louis Armstrong. This has lead police on many
> wild Goose chases.
>
> Simon Cooke advises upgrading to Service Pack 2,403.
If you push this, you'll find that I'm not one to take this matter lightly.
If you continue, you can expect a single warning at your home phone: (253)
520-4945.
Then you will be receiving a letter from my lawyer.
This is your final warning.
Simon
...........................................
As Simon did above. Note Mark Bilk has not posted anyones info on line,
no matter how this Wintroll wishes to portray it.
So far we have *one* poster who has, Simon Cooke himself.
> or supporting it,
Nonsense, if Simon wants to make war with someone, he better be
prepared to go *all* the way.
> shows that you are a low life
> scumbag, and I hope someone does the same for you resulting in you
> getting in real trouble so that you learn a valuable lesson.
I suspect the bad karma is all yours, o saintly one.
>
> Also if you think that anyone looks in an advocacy news group to
> determine whether to hire someone or to continue hiring him, makes look
> even more stupid than what you already are.
You might be suprised.
T.G. Reaper
> That's why I divorce myself from any of that, and I don't even like my
> name (fake as it is) associated with it. He was worthless as a human
> being IN MY OPINION. But that doesn't warrant what was done to him.
I just wanted to say SM, that while you and I have disagreed and debated
about many things here in cola, I respect your willingness to stand up and
distance yourself from or what was essentially unjustified act of
retribution.
Simon's remarks wrt your brother were in bad taste, and provocative to say
the least, but I sense that even you realize they were just words in a
usenet message, and not really anything an intelligent human being should
allow to bother them.
If anyone here could have possibly had justification for contacting
Simon's ISP it would have been you, the person who contacted his employer
was way out of line.
--
Cheers
T.G. Reaper
Vipin Bhargava
> On Mon, 01 Sep 2003 15:55:07 GMT,
> Vipin Bhargava <vipin@shaw_remove_this_.ca> wrote:
>
>>
>>For anyone advocating any OS over another, that would be
>>their only possible purpose. Whether Linux, Windows, AIX,
>>OS/2, CPM, what other purpose is there in an advocay group?
>
>
> No, the purpose of advocating an OS _truthfully_ is to give
> people the accurate information they need for deciding whether
> or not to try it. That is not at all _deceiving_ them!
The last thing expected in these forums is "truth". Truth
can only be found here if you believe in the cause so
feverently that all else escapes you.
Accuracy falls by the wayside with truth. I seriously do
hope you don't expect anything resembling truth to be found
anywhere here.
You can sit all day and diss Windows <version>, yet you
will always be able to find people ready to call you a liar.
> Bhargava's statement implies that he believes falsehoods and
> truths, and also educating and deceiving, are equivalent.
> That is factually and morally absurd.
>
Exactly what I've been saying, albeit quite different than
how you wrote it. This forum is very factually and morally
absurd!
>
>>And if no one refuted any positive Linux posts with negative
>>Linux posts, what would the group be? A bunch of geeks
>>patting themselves on the back? Wow, that would be interesting.
>
>
> Here Bhargava equates the many hundreds of lies posted by
> Simon Cooke with "negative Linux posts", as if Cooke merely
> wrote that he personally didn't prefer Linux. That's not what
> he did that justifies breaching his anonymity; he purposely
> _lied_ about the facts of GNU/Linux and its creators many
> hundreds (or thousands) of times. He did it intentionally in
> order to misinform visitors to COLA.
Proper information is the first thing to go around here.
I'm not sure what you need in order to see that? So what
if he lies? It's his problem.
My question to you is, are you truly expecting someone to
read posts here in c.o.l.a. and then decide on whether or not
to use Linux?
>>
>>SOP in todays world. Lie about your competitor. Most don't
>>let it get out of hand, though.
>
>
> Bhargava has separated two parts of a sentence that need to be
> read together. The point is that people are much more likely to
> believe something if they hear it from multiple sources. That's
> why Microsoft broadcasts its anti-Linux lies by at least three
> routes: 1. overtly, in its own advertising and position papers,
> 2. by inducing dishonest journalists to include them in their
> columns and stories, and 3. by paying individuals to write
> letters that appear to be from "grassroots" people (in this
> case, individual unaffiliated users). (False grassroots
> messages are called "astroturf"; they are widely used by greedy
> businessmen against, e.g., environmentalists.)
>
> So although a particular person might not be deceived into
> rejecting GNU/Linux solely as a result of reading Simon Cooke's
> lies, or solely from reading lies from Microsoft directly or
> via columnists, they may very well be successfully deceived by
> the lies from two or three of these routes acting together.
> Therefore Cooke bears moral responsibility for the harm done to
> the people who have been thus deceived (as does Microsoft itself,
> of course.)
Then most any company out there is guilty of the same irresponsiblity.
A marketting campaign takes on many different aspects. Including
"grassroots", including columnists, and including lies, deceit,
slight-of-hand.
You don't really think McDonalds food is healthy do you?
Or that Windex is better than Glass Plus?
How about diamonds are very rare?
Oil companies are enviornmentally friendly?
Bottled water is better than tap water? (Ok, ok, I admit that
in some areas this is true ;-)
The whole world around you is full of lies. It's up to you to sort
the truth from the lies. A usenet group sure isn't going to help
you.
>>Ah, yes, the grassroots campaigning. Been done for a very
>>long time, MS isn't the first, they certainly won't be the last.
>>However, it is wrong to do, I will give you that. The best
>>way is to find them, and then embarrass them.
>
>
> Well, this is exactly what was accomplished by publishing the
> name of his employer. Cooke was exposed and embarrassed many
> times on Usenet alone, but it did not motivate him to stop
> posting his lies.
Perhaps you are not familiar with "what happens on the ice
stays on the ice"? Hmm. "What happens on the field, stays
on the field?" You don't carry your grudge out of the
forum where it occurred.
>>>Some of the employers that received Simon Cooke's lies, and
>>>thought as a result that they had no choice but to go on paying
>>>Microsoft's huge license fees, may have therefore had to pay
>>>their workers less, or even lay off some of them, in order to
>>>continue paying the Microsoft tax.
>>
>>Ok, now you're stretching. Once again, a post in Usenet
>>hardly qualifies as a reasonable opinion on any product.
>>I don't want to work for any company that makes its decisions
>>based on .advocacy groups.
>
>
> A post in Usenet is no more or less valid than a message in any
> other forum. People usually try to evaluate whether a message
> they receive by any route is true or false, but clever falsehoods,
> especially when delivered through several routes simultaneously,
> often succeed in deceiving them.
>
Usenet can be very useful. However, an advocacy group cannot.
15 minutes of sifting through the crap around here would show
anyone that.
If the falsehoods are through different channels, then perhaps
it's time the Linux groups started using those channels as well,
or better yet, come up with a new one!
>>Irrelevant who pays him for what. If MS wants to pay someone
>>to piss off a bunch of geeks like us, let them. They have
>>to put that $50 billion somewhere. :-)
>
>
> That's not why they pay them. They do it to deceive people who
> visit COLA looking for information about GNU/Linux. Every person
> they deceive means big money continuing to flow to Microsoft.
Visit COLA, drop a couple of pro-MS posts, and watch the ensuing
chaos. Very simple. COLA isn't the only one.
Go back, visit archives of "comp.os.os2.advocacy". And non-computer,
try "rec.sport.hockey", search for Maynard. That was amusing.
I'm sure there are many more.
>>Nope. It's the ones who make decisions based on c.o.l.a
>>articles that should be posted here. I need a good laugh.
>
>
> Bhargava again ignores the synergistic effect of Simon Cooke's
> lies that was explained in the original post.
>
I would still like to see a list of those who believe the
stuff posted here, and who makes decisions based on it.
Like I said, I need a good laugh.
>
>>No matter how you try to justify it, you haven't shown he
>>has a lack of morals. In fact, if the above is all there is,
>>I question the morals of the person who posted the info.
>
>
> Bhargava evaded the moral analysis in the original post. His
> evasions have been corrected here.
No they haven't. In fact, none of my observations were
answered. They were just repeated.
The main point was also avoided.
>
>
>>I haven't seen the info, nor do I want to. Further, my
>>current understanding is that the person who posted the
>>info did it anonymously. Yup, that's standing for your
>>convictions. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
>
>
> The person who posted the information may not have the money
> to defend himself against a fraudulent lawsuit brought by
> Simon Cooke. Unfortunately, in our legal system a person
> who merely tells the truth may still have to spend a lot of
> money on lawyers.
>
Irrelevant. The poster exemplified cowardice in his/her
actions.
>
>>>People should not be permitted to harm others anonymously.
>>>Even if they're not punished by the legal system, their evil
>>>actions should be publicized so that others can decide whether
>>>or not to associate with them.
>>
>>What harm, what evil actions? Calling someone names on the
>>internet? Somehow I think he's in that group that will say
>>things on the internet he wouldn't say in person. And I'm
>>sure there are many many many others like him around here.
>
>
> Again Bhargava ignores the clear proof given for the harm done
> by Simon Cooke.
>
Let me see if I understand. If someone says to me, "Hey,
I saw Linux, looked interesting. I need a computer, for games
and stuff." If I reply, "Then you're best off getting Windows,"
then I'm harming...well, someone??
And if I feel that perhaps the person isn't quite ready for
something like Linux?
>
>>> Why is Simon Cooke objecting
>>>to people telling his employer what he's been doing? If he'd
>>>been posting the truth on Usenet he'd have nothing to hide, and
>>>his employer would not think ill of him upon receiving letters
>>>describing his actions.
>>
>>Because it's personal info. His info. Info that need not be
>>shared. Doesn't matter what his employer thinks, his employer
>>should not be involved at all.
>
>
> Actually, since Simon Cooke has been involved in a project of
> continuous fraud and deception for several years, which means
> he is quite willing to harm others in order to benefit himself,
> it's certainly possible that he might have been defrauding and
> deceiving his employer as well. If this is the case, anyone
> who knows of Cooke's Usenet activities and the identity of his
> employer, and does _not_ inform the employer of the facts, is
> morally guilty of aiding and abetting.
>
Once again, you are stretching. If he's lied to his employer,
let's see it. You are trying to justify wrong actions by
making up actions.
>>So what? He calls people names, they call him names back.
>>That fits right in with another post about what this group
>>is all about. Here's the real purspose of this .advocacy
>>group:
>>
>>It's to call people names, and have them call you names
>>right back.
>
>
> Yet again, Bhargava evades the fact that Simon Cooke has posted
> many hundreds of lies against GNU/Linux, with the intentional
> purpose of deceiving people into not using it. This is far more
> harmful than merely "calling people names".
>
Yet you avoid the fact that .advocacy groups rarely have anything
to do with "truth", and that no one should be relying on them
to make any decisions.
Vip
GreyCloud
Correct and agree.
manfrommars_43
oh really?
well i just nosed into these other 'lofty' newsgroups
and in comp.os.linux.development, for instance,
i see the biggest (by far) thread is the very
COLA-like:
References: <K6eya.36245$823....@news1.east.cox.net> <baqapm$1j7$1...@hercules.btinternet.com> <6TaAa.98179$823....@news1.east.cox.net> <olbAa.379$np3.45...@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com> <NsoAa.106230$823....@news1.east.cox.net>
Subject: Re: SCO suing IBM over rights to Unix/Linux
Mark S Bilk
>Mark S Bilk wrote:
>> On Mon, 01 Sep 2003 15:55:07 GMT,
>> Vipin Bhargava <vipin@shaw_remove_this_.ca> wrote:
>> No, the purpose of advocating an OS _truthfully_ is to give
>> people the accurate information they need for deciding whether
>> or not to try it. That is not at all _deceiving_ them!
>
>The last thing expected in these forums is "truth". Truth
>can only be found here if you believe in the cause so
>feverently that all else escapes you.
Bhargava uses the passive voice in these two sentences --
omits the identity of the person who expects truth in COLA --
in order to evade the following facts:
The Linux advocates in COLA expect and post the truth.
The visitors to COLA who come seeking information about Linux
(whether they post or just "lurk") expect the truth.
The Microsoft propagandists in COLA post lies.
And the Microsoft propagandists also claim, like Bhargava,
that COLA is just a garbage pit full of lies. They do this
to justify their lying attacks on GNU/Linux and its creators,
advocates, and users.
>Accuracy falls by the wayside with truth. I seriously do
>hope you don't expect anything resembling truth to be found
>anywhere here.
I certainly do, and I frequently find it, from the pro-Linux
people.
>> Bhargava's statement implies that he believes falsehoods and
>> truths, and also educating and deceiving, are equivalent.
>> That is factually and morally absurd.
>
>Exactly what I've been saying, albeit quite different than
>how you wrote it. This forum is very factually and morally
>absurd!
And yet Bhargava is here. He says he wants "a good laugh".
Since he has no regard for the truth, he should not be trusted.
>Proper information is the first thing to go around here.
>I'm not sure what you need in order to see that? So what
>if he lies? It's his problem.
No, it's a problem for people who come to COLA seeking
information.
>My question to you is, are you truly expecting someone to
>read posts here in c.o.l.a. and then decide on whether or not
>to use Linux?
Lots of people do come here and ask for advice regarding that
decision.
>> So although a particular person might not be deceived into
>> rejecting GNU/Linux solely as a result of reading Simon Cooke's
>> lies, or solely from reading lies from Microsoft directly or
>> via columnists, they may very well be successfully deceived by
>> the lies from two or three of these routes acting together.
>> Therefore Cooke bears moral responsibility for the harm done to
>> the people who have been thus deceived (as does Microsoft itself,
>> of course.)
>
>Then most any company out there is guilty of the same irresponsiblity.
I avoid such companies whenever possible. It's worth noting that
Microsoft often lies about their products and the competition,
while Linux distributers (except for SCO) tell the truth.
>The whole world around you is full of lies. It's up to you to sort
>the truth from the lies. A usenet group sure isn't going to help
>you.
A Usenet newsgroup is a communication device. It does help the
reader, provided that people post the truth to it. Pro-Linux
people do, and most anti-Linux people don't.
>>>Ah, yes, the grassroots campaigning. Been done for a very
>>>long time, MS isn't the first, they certainly won't be the last.
>>>However, it is wrong to do, I will give you that. The best
>>>way is to find them, and then embarrass them.
>>
>> Well, this is exactly what was accomplished by publishing the
>> name of his employer. Cooke was exposed and embarrassed many
>> times on Usenet alone, but it did not motivate him to stop
>> posting his lies.
>
>Perhaps you are not familiar with "what happens on the ice
>stays on the ice"? Hmm. "What happens on the field, stays
>on the field?" You don't carry your grudge out of the
>forum where it occurred.
Simon Cooke's lies have likely had real-world consequences for
people who came to COLA seeking information about GNU/Linux.
His real-world associates should know what he's been doing.
>>>>Some of the employers that received Simon Cooke's lies, and
>>>>thought as a result that they had no choice but to go on paying
>>>>Microsoft's huge license fees, may have therefore had to pay
>>>>their workers less, or even lay off some of them, in order to
>>>>continue paying the Microsoft tax.
>>>
>>>Ok, now you're stretching. Once again, a post in Usenet
>>>hardly qualifies as a reasonable opinion on any product.
>>>I don't want to work for any company that makes its decisions
>>>based on .advocacy groups.
Again, people frequently come to COLA and ask for information.
They have no reason to believe they aren't being told the truth
just because the subject of the group is advocacy.
>Usenet can be very useful. However, an advocacy group cannot.
>15 minutes of sifting through the crap around here would show
>anyone that.
So Bhargava comes here and posts crap of his own.
In fact, the charter of COLA is: "For discussion of the
benefits of Linux compared to other operating systems."
It does _not_ say, "For the posting of lies and garbage."
>>>Nope. It's the ones who make decisions based on c.o.l.a
>>>articles that should be posted here. I need a good laugh.
>
>I would still like to see a list of those who believe the
>stuff posted here, and who makes decisions based on it.
>Like I said, I need a good laugh.
Then, Bhargava, contemplate yourself. You have given up honesty
and critical thinking, and you have abandoned respect for the
truth. You don't care whether people are harmed or not, but
you're eager to have "a good laugh" at their misfortune. You
have lost your way. The consciousness that you had when you
were a child is now gone.
Bhargava, you may be able to reawaken, and become a conscious
human being again. Some people succeed at this. Look at the
book references at the bottom of my Web page:
Get a copy of _The Chalice and the Blade_, _In Search of the
Miraculous_, and whatever you can find by Wilhelm Reich. Read
them as if your life depended on what you learn. It does.
manfrommars_43
We were talking
about the space
between ourselves.
paul cooke
>
> Perhaps you are not familiar with "what happens on the ice
> stays on the ice"? Hmm. "What happens on the field, stays
> on the field?" You don't carry your grudge out of the
> forum where it occurred.
this is _not_ "sport"... Microsoft has declared "war" on Linux and all GPL
software.
--
Has your ms-windows computer been turned into a SPAM server???
<http://www.computerweekly.com/Article123378.htm>
Jim Richardson
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, 01 Sep 2003 22:35:23 GMT,
Mark <mark12...@SPAMyahoo.com> wrote:
> In article <mrH4b.321511$o%2.145945@sccrnsc02>
> ma...@cosmicpenguin.com (Mark S Bilk) wrote:
>
>>[Bullshit snipped]
>
> No matter how you try to justify it, posting someone's private
> information on usenet or supporting it, shows that you are a low life
> scumbag, and I hope someone does the same for you resulting in you
> getting in real trouble so that you learn a valuable lesson.
>
So, since you are supporting someone else, doing this to Mark S, then
you are a low life scumbag, right?
Nice to meet you Mr Scumbag.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE/VFahd90bcYOAWPYRAlAcAKCBm2JWBDsoA1HDyw3AKrueMdpragCgrVGw
e5mOUWcnv4eKQlQUwieykOo=
=q0Wq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because eventually, you grow up enough to be trusted with a fork()
Joseph Haig
>
> Harming other people is what we describe as bad, immoral,
> unethical, evil, etc. Refraining from harming others is the
> sole basis of all sane systems of morality.
>
Stop for a minute and try to apply this to yourself. Would you
describe your actions as good, moral and ethical? I do not agree with
Simon's views and I admit at times that I would question his motives
for posting here but that doesn't change the fact that you have
deliberately harmed him, which by your own statement is not fitting in
a sane system of morality.
And I'm afraid I do not consider the "but he did it first" argument as
valid outside of the school playground.
CG
> Simon Cooke does not deserve any sympathy.
sympathy is not the issue
> Over the years
> he has posted many hundreds of lies and insinuationss about
> GNU/Linux and its creators.
and he's the only one, right?
> Some of the employers that received Simon Cooke's lies, and
> thought as a result that they had no choice but to go on paying
> Microsoft's huge license fees, may have therefore had to pay
> their workers less, or even lay off some of them, in order to
> continue paying the Microsoft tax.
>
lots of wild assumptions here.
This is usenet. Problems that start here should end here. You don't
interfere with a man's livelihood for such silly stuff.
Jesse F. Hughes
everything that goes on here. If anyone came to COLA in order to
facilitate a business decision on whether or not to employ Linux and
left persuaded by Simon's silver tongue, then they get what they
deserve.
Simon's an asshole. However, contacting his place of employment
regarding his activities here (which may be dishonest, mendacious,
duplicitous or not) was unreasonable and probably immoral.
I don't agree that everything said on Usenet need stay on Usenet, but
I have seen nothing of Simon's behavior which warrants contacting his
employer.
(Of course, he has been in my killfile for years, so if you have
specific instances of abusive behavior by Simon that are so beyond the
pale of acceptable standards, then I may be uninformed. But spreading
lies about the acceptability of Linux does not, in my opinion, warrant
such reactions. Maybe if he had claimed that Linus Torvalds raped his
own mother, or something similar...)
--
Jesse F. Hughes
"I have written many words to sci.math, some of them are not even
meaningless." --Ross Finlayson
Daeron
> Simon's postings here are inconsequential blather, like almost
> everything that goes on here. If anyone came to COLA in order to
> facilitate a business decision on whether or not to employ Linux and
> left persuaded by Simon's silver tongue, then they get what they
> deserve.
> Simon's an asshole. However, contacting his place of employment
> regarding his activities here (which may be dishonest, mendacious,
> duplicitous or not) was unreasonable and probably immoral.
> I don't agree that everything said on Usenet need stay on Usenet, but
> I have seen nothing of Simon's behavior which warrants contacting
> his employer.
> (Of course, he has been in my killfile for years, so if you have
> specific instances of abusive behavior by Simon that are so beyond
> the pale of acceptable standards, then I may be uninformed. But
> spreading lies about the acceptability of Linux does not, in my
> opinion, warrant such reactions. Maybe if he had claimed that Linus
> Torvalds raped his own mother, or something similar...)
<direct quotes from Simon Cooke>
.. Alan, your Brother misses you. He wants you to join him ..
.. Now, please excuse me... I have to get back to defecating on your
brother's grave ..
.. So just why *did* your brother kill himself, Alan? Was it because he
couldn't stand to hear your voice any more? ..
.. Don't forget that Sinister Midget's brother is very very fucking
dead, and hopefully Sinister will be joining him soon ..
.. Bzzztt... sorry, but you're talking out of your arse ..
.. So in your opinion, Terry is only good for wiping arses with ..
.. Bzzzt... .. you're talking out of your arse ..
.. God you're a stupid fucker ..
.. TMax, you're a fucking LIAR ..
.. Bzzzzzzzttttttttttt.... Faulty reporting ..
.. go ahead - make yourself look stupid ..
.. With a sub-room temperature IQ, how could you be expected to know
that? ..
<unquote>
Shane Phelps
> On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 22:10:22 GMT, in
> <v67ftrs3ckrr.g...@40tude.net>,
> Simon Cooke <simon...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>>For the past few years, I've always kept a very strict line
>>between my employment and my posts to Usenet. My views are
>>my own, and I don't see any reason to bring my employer
>>into it. It's none of their business, and has no bearing on
>>my opinions.
>>
>>and Paul Cooke - saw fit to change that. They posted my work
>>information here.
>>
>>Doug Mentohl is now taking this further. He's writing to my
>>employers, and is threatening to write to their customers.
>
> actions was to deceive people into not trying the software.
>
>
> Considering the likely harmful results of his anti-Linux smear
> campaign, and the fact that he knew full well that these results
> would occur, and did it anyhow, it was morally justifiable to
> post his personal information, so that he might experience at
> least some of the negative consequences that his actions have
> probably caused for many other people.
>
>
For what my opinion is worth, *I* don't think it was justified.
It ranks down there with <a usually well behaved Windows advocate>
posting <a rather wordy Linux advocate>'s pecadillos to the group. That
incident was below the belt and was soundly condemned. It cuts both ways -
we shouldn't accept double standards.
Jazz
> In article <3f53a9f0$1...@corp.newsgroups.com>
> Donn Miller <dmmi...@cvzoom.net> wrote:
>
>>What?! I suggest you do some investigations on Google. Fact: COLA
>>was founded because some imbeciles were clogging up c.o.l.* with all
>>kinds
>>of advocacy crap. Thus, COLA was created get those people out of
>>there.
>> It's a place where people can advocate Linux, and talk about pretty
>>much anything, really, but the goal is to get the off-topic garbage
>>out
>>of the rest of c.o.l.*. You can talk about charters, etc., and some
>>people have made c.o.l.a out to serve a much loftier purpose that it
>>really does. That doesn't change the fact, and the absolute,
>>bottom-line fact that COLA was created to divert the garbage,
>>advocates, kooks, flamers, and weirdos out of c.o.l.* so people who
>>want to find out about Linux can do so without wading through tons of
>>crap.
>
> Finally, someone who has an idea of what cola is for.
Well -- yeah, that, plus it's fun.
--
Jazz.
"Curculionem Darl McBride minusculum habet."
(Cato - Pro Lino; Apocrypha)
T.G. Reaper
><direct quotes from Simon Cooke>
>.. Alan, your Brother misses you. He wants you to join him ..
>
>.. Now, please excuse me... I have to get back to defecating on your
>brother's grave ..
>
>.. So just why *did* your brother kill himself, Alan? Was it because he
>couldn't stand to hear your voice any more? ..
>
>.. Don't forget that Sinister Midget's brother is very very fucking
>dead, and hopefully Sinister will be joining him soon ..
>
Those are quotes that might justify Sinister Midget taking some kind
of action.
They certainly don't provide justification for *You* doing anything.
It's not you're job to protect cola or other people from bad words.
>.. Bzzztt... sorry, but you're talking out of your arse ..
>
>.. So in your opinion, Terry is only good for wiping arses with ..
>
>.. Bzzzt... .. you're talking out of your arse ..
>
>.. God you're a stupid fucker ..
>
>.. TMax, you're a fucking LIAR ..
>
>.. Bzzzzzzzttttttttttt.... Faulty reporting ..
>
>.. go ahead - make yourself look stupid ..
>
>.. With a sub-room temperature IQ, how could you be expected to know
>that? ..
><unquote>
The same and much worse is exchanged in here every day. Examine some
of the threads involving The Judge, K-Man, et al... are you going to
be contacting their employers as well?
--
Cheers
T.G. Reaper
Daeron
> On Tue, 02 Sep 2003 17:06:04 -0400, Daeron <dae...@demon.net> wrote:
>> <direct quotes from Simon Cooke> .. Alan, your Brother misses you.
>> He wants you to join him ..
>> .. Now, please excuse me... I have to get back to defecating on
>> your brother's grave ..
>> .. So just why *did* your brother kill himself, Alan? Was it
>> because he couldn't stand to hear your voice any more? ..
>> .. Don't forget that Sinister Midget's brother is very very fucking
>> dead, and hopefully Sinister will be joining him soon ..
> Those are quotes that might justify Sinister Midget taking some kind
> of action.
> They certainly don't provide justification for *You* doing anything.
I'm not trying to clean up COLA. If I decide on a cource of action I
neither ask for nor require your permission to carry it out.
As I said elsewhere this stuff personally *offends* *me*.
As I said elsewhere I did warn him.
People can generally take me at my word.
Erik Funkenbusch
Daeron, you and people like Terry, Bilk and Paul cooke are doing for
Linux advocacy what doctor killers did for the pro-life movement.
Trying to assasinate them (either physically or economically) because
you disagree with them is the lowest form of advocacy. In fact, it's
basically censorship.
You're helping to maintain the image that Linux advocates are kooks who
will do anything to get their way.
I know you won't see it that way, but just about everyone else does.
Wake up.
Daeron
<snip>
> I know you won't see it that way, but just about everyone else does.
> Wake up.
What you did to Rex Ballard was A-OK then ?
<snort> lectures on ethics from a shitbag</snort>
Erik Funkenbusch
I did nothing to Rex. I posted my position on this before. Rex posted
his own information publicly to usenet. That was his choice. I saw
nothing wrong with the message and was merely responding to a request
for what he looked like.
I have several friends that are open cross dressers. It doesn't shock
or disturb me. It's not even out of the ordinary. If you think the
content of the message was offensive, that says more about YOU than
either Rex or I.
Jim Trice
I think you're mis-interpretting his motivation here Erik. Its not
Simon's pro-Windows/anti-Linux stance that percipitated Daeron's
behaviour. Its Simon's episodic childish temper tantrums that carry
him well beyond the bounds of what is acceptable to normal civil
society that has lead to this. Even joyously low life scumbags like
Kaidatchi only abuse the poster, not their dead relatives or disabled
children that they happen to have chosen to take responsibility for.
With the censorship angle I suspect you are confusing Daeron's
motivations with Mark S. Bilk's take on it that began this thread.
>
> You're helping to maintain the image that Linux advocates are kooks
> who will do anything to get their way.
>
> I know you won't see it that way, but just about everyone else does.
> Wake up.
I agree with the last two points. Perceptions are important. I think
that Daeron's action was about as morally dubious as some of Simon's
worst posts. Nearly as disappointing is that it was a tactically dumb
move that gives away a lot of moral high ground for fuck all return.
Regards
Jim
chrisv
<er...@despam-funkenbusch.com> wrote:
>I have several friends that are open cross dressers.
!
Where do you live, San Fran? I don't have ANY friends who are open
cross dressers. Not that there's anything wrong with that. 8)
>It doesn't shock or disturb me. It's not even out of the ordinary.
Yes it is.
----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
Sinister Midget
> On Tue, 02 Sep 2003 23:42:28 GMT, Erik Funkenbusch
><er...@despam-funkenbusch.com> wrote:
>
>>I have several friends that are open cross dressers.
>
> !
>
> Where do you live, San Fran? I don't have ANY friends who are open
> cross dressers. Not that there's anything wrong with that. 8)
That was Erik's impersonation of "I don't dislike blacks. Hell, one of
my *friends* is black!"
--
I wanted to make a list of all Microsoft innovations. Then I remembered
that CTRL-ALT-DEL is handled by the BIOS.
Erik Funkenbusch
> On Tue, 02 Sep 2003 23:42:28 GMT, Erik Funkenbusch
> <er...@despam-funkenbusch.com> wrote:
>
>
>>I have several friends that are open cross dressers.
> !
>
> Where do you live, San Fran? I don't have ANY friends who are open
> cross dressers. Not that there's anything wrong with that. 8)
Minneapolis is very "gay friendly", though cross dressers aren't
necessarily gay. As my friends have beat into me, there's a difference
between "Gender Identity" and "Gender Preference".
>>It doesn't shock or disturb me. It's not even out of the ordinary.
>
> Yes it is.
Maybe in Arkansas.
chrisv
<er...@despam-funkenbusch.com> wrote:
>chrisv wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 02 Sep 2003 23:42:28 GMT, Erik Funkenbusch
>> <er...@despam-funkenbusch.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I have several friends that are open cross dressers.
>
>> !
>>
>> Where do you live, San Fran? I don't have ANY friends who are open
>> cross dressers. Not that there's anything wrong with that. 8)
>
>Minneapolis is very "gay friendly", though cross dressers aren't
>necessarily gay. As my friends have beat into me, there's a difference
>between "Gender Identity" and "Gender Preference".
Yet it all seems to end with *somebody* taking it up the chute. 8)
>>>It doesn't shock or disturb me. It's not even out of the ordinary.
>>
>> Yes it is.
>
>Maybe in Arkansas.
Ever see Deliverance? 8)
Michael Vester
> On Wed, 03 Sep 2003 17:36:53 GMT, Erik Funkenbusch
> <er...@despam-funkenbusch.com> wrote:
>
> >chrisv wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, 02 Sep 2003 23:42:28 GMT, Erik Funkenbusch
> >> <er...@despam-funkenbusch.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>I have several friends that are open cross dressers.
> >
> >> !
> >>
> >> Where do you live, San Fran? I don't have ANY friends who are open
> >> cross dressers. Not that there's anything wrong with that. 8)
> >
> >Minneapolis is very "gay friendly", though cross dressers aren't
> >necessarily gay. As my friends have beat into me, there's a
> >difference between "Gender Identity" and "Gender Preference".
>
> Yet it all seems to end with *somebody* taking it up the chute. 8)
>
> >>>It doesn't shock or disturb me. It's not even out of the ordinary.
> >>
> >> Yes it is.
> >
> >Maybe in Arkansas.
>
> Ever see Deliverance? 8)
>
Squeal like a pig?
--
2:45pm up 3 days, 5:34, 1 user, load average: 1.22, 1.15, 1.10
112 processes: 109 sleeping, 3 running, 0 zombie, 0 stopped
CPU states: 4.9% user, 1.1% system, 0.0% nice, 1.5% idle
To email me, change .com to .ca Linux Counter Registration #126647
DarkHills
>> >Maybe in Arkansas.
>>
>> Ever see Deliverance? 8)
>>
> Squeal like a pig?
Obligatory Robin Williams:
"You a farmboy? You'll remember this sound - Squeeeeaaalll!"
:)
--
DarkHills
[[[Pan: The Galactic Gargle-Blaster of Newsreaders]]]
We are Pentium of Borg. Division is futile. You will be approximated.
All trolls are promptly killfiled. You decide whether you want to talk.
GreyCloud
>
> chrisv wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 02 Sep 2003 23:42:28 GMT, Erik Funkenbusch
> > <er...@despam-funkenbusch.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>I have several friends that are open cross dressers.
>
> > !
> >
> > Where do you live, San Fran? I don't have ANY friends who are open
> > cross dressers. Not that there's anything wrong with that. 8)
>
> Minneapolis is very "gay friendly", though cross dressers aren't
> necessarily gay. As my friends have beat into me, there's a difference
> between "Gender Identity" and "Gender Preference".
>
Odd that you use the words "beat into me". But it doesn't
matter to me what your preferences are.
> >>It doesn't shock or disturb me. It's not even out of the ordinary.
> >
> > Yes it is.
>
> Maybe in Arkansas.
Or, just about the rest of the country as well.
Mr. Berserker
> Mr. Berserker threw some tea leaves on the floor
> and this is what they wrote:
>
> ><snip>
> >
> >> > Simon Cooke does not deserve any sympathy. Over the years
> >> > he has posted many hundreds of lies and insinuationss about
> >> > GNU/Linux and its creators. The only possible purpose of his
> >> > actions was to deceive people into not trying the software.
> >>
> >>
> >> Agree with your analysis (as usual).
> >
> > I disagree with Mark Bilk.
>
> And I agree. His analysis over the years I have been here, has been
> right to the best of my recollection.
I didn't mean: I always disagree with him. I simply don't want 'eye
for eye and tooth for tooth' policy.
>
> > Though I may slam trolls, I have become
> > merciful over the years.
>
> Sadly the Wintrolls haven't had the same change of heart.
Yes, that may be true, but consider Voltaire's philosophies.
>
> > "Let the one among you who is without sin
> > cast the first stone."
>
> Too religious for me.
Well, I have no idea where you stand on religion but that is still a
good philosophy.
>
> > After all, when Frodo Baggins and Samwise
> > Gamgee pitied Gollum, he eventually ended up destroying the One Ring.
>
> Only because after he had bitten of Frodo's finger to steal the ring
> away from him, Gollum fell into Mt Doom by accident.
Yes, but the lesson of the day was pity. As it was in the Quenta
Silmarillion.
>
> > Is Gollum as bad as $COoke; who knows? :)
>
> Gollums heart was black from years of association with the ring, he
> wasn't stupid.
Just had poor grammar...Actually Simone is pretty smart. But he is
Proud and ignorant.
>
> >
> > Seriously, I think it was extreme to destroy Kooke.
>
> He's not destroyed. Simon thought nothing of posting personal phone
> numbers of his opposition on line and someone (not me, I'm not an
> anonymous coward) posted his details on line.
>
> Tough.
>
> He got as good as he gave, and that's ok by me.
It is not a good attitude to take...the world will not be mended by
acts of revenge.
>
> Simon has flounced off, but you can be sure he will be back, it's a
> little early to begin whipping yourself over him.
I think he will too...
Terry
and this is what they wrote:
> Terry <tjpo...@gronk.porter.net> wrote in message news:<on6d21-...@gronk.porter.net>...
>> Mr. Berserker threw some tea leaves on the floor
>> and this is what they wrote:
>>
>> ><snip>
>> >
>> >> > Simon Cooke does not deserve any sympathy. Over the years
>> >> > he has posted many hundreds of lies and insinuationss about
>> >> > GNU/Linux and its creators. The only possible purpose of his
>> >> > actions was to deceive people into not trying the software.
>> >>
>> >> <deletia>
>> >>
>> >> Agree with your analysis (as usual).
>> >
>> > I disagree with Mark Bilk.
>>
>> And I agree. His analysis over the years I have been here, has been
>> right to the best of my recollection.
>
> I didn't mean: I always disagree with him. I simply don't want 'eye
> for eye and tooth for tooth' policy.
I'm not sure that Mark advocates that, and I certainly don't
in *most* cases.
>>
>> > Though I may slam trolls, I have become
>> > merciful over the years.
>>
>> Sadly the Wintrolls haven't had the same change of heart.
>
> Yes, that may be true, but consider Voltaire's philosophies.
The closest to Voltaire's philosophies I have come, is the humble volt.
>
>>
>> > "Let the one among you who is without sin
>> > cast the first stone."
>>
>> Too religious for me.
>
> Well, I have no idea where you stand on religion but that is still a
> good philosophy.
I'm not religous, but it is a good philosophy, you're so right.
>
>>
>> > After all, when Frodo Baggins and Samwise
>> > Gamgee pitied Gollum, he eventually ended up destroying the One Ring.
>>
>> Only because after he had bitten of Frodo's finger to steal the ring
>> away from him, Gollum fell into Mt Doom by accident.
>
> Yes, but the lesson of the day was pity.
I didn't see it that way, I thought the lesson of the day was "watch
out for lying deceitful hobbits whose hearts have been ruined beyond
salvage by powerful forces beyond their understanding" ?
Hmm, I nearly typed "Wintroll" there instead of Hobbit.
>As it was in the Quenta
> Silmarillion.
I'm not as nearly read as you I fear.
>
>>
>> > Is Gollum as bad as $COoke; who knows? :)
>>
>> Gollums heart was black from years of association with the ring, he
>> wasn't stupid.
>
> Just had poor grammar...Actually Simone is pretty smart. But he is
> Proud and ignorant.
I'd go along with that. However pride and ignorance are a good
substitute for stupidity.
A sad fact is that I'm not his enemy, I only hassle Wintrolls and the
sooner Simon starts using his intelligence on Cola the sooner he can
have a reasonable discussion with me.
>
>>
>> >
>> > Seriously, I think it was extreme to destroy Kooke.
>>
>> He's not destroyed. Simon thought nothing of posting personal phone
>> numbers of his opposition on line and someone (not me, I'm not an
>> anonymous coward) posted his details on line.
>>
>> Tough.
>>
>> He got as good as he gave, and that's ok by me.
>
> It is not a good attitude to take...the world will not be mended by
> acts of revenge.
Actually I haven't supported any 'acts of revenge", because I believe
that revenge is a wasted emotion, and it usually feeds on the one who
has it.
I feel that any honest action in response to being attacked, is
allowable, it's up to the parties concerned.
>>
>> Simon has flounced off, but you can be sure he will be back, it's a
>> little early to begin whipping yourself over him.
>
> I think he will too...
And he is, under the guise of Milo T.
Always a pleasure debating with you Mr Beserker, we may not agree at
times, but I admire your style.
--
Kind Regards from Terry
My Desktop is powered by GNU/LinuX, Gentoo-1.4_rc2
New Homepage: http://milkstone.d2.net.au/
** Linux Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
Jesse F. Hughes
> Jesse F. Hughes wrote:
>
>> (Of course, he has been in my killfile for years, so if you have
>> specific instances of abusive behavior by Simon that are so beyond
>> the pale of acceptable standards, then I may be uninformed. But
>> spreading lies about the acceptability of Linux does not, in my
>> opinion, warrant such reactions. Maybe if he had claimed that Linus
>> Torvalds raped his own mother, or something similar...)
>
> <direct quotes from Simon Cooke>
> .. Alan, your Brother misses you. He wants you to join him ..
>
> .. Now, please excuse me... I have to get back to defecating on your
> brother's grave ..
>
> .. So just why *did* your brother kill himself, Alan? Was it because he
> couldn't stand to hear your voice any more? ..
>
> .. Don't forget that Sinister Midget's brother is very very fucking
> dead, and hopefully Sinister will be joining him soon ..
The above four quotes are indeed abusive and reprehensible. I don't
know whether contacting one's employer is an appropriate response to
these offensive words or not. Clearly, Simon crossed the line of even
marginally acceptable behavior here.
> .. Bzzztt... sorry, but you're talking out of your arse ..
But, now, *this* quote is completely harmless. I refer to talking
out one's ass regularly, even when I talk out my own. Perhaps a
common idiom has been lost in translation here.
I didn't care about the remainder of the quotes, either. They're
merely garden-variety insults.
> .. So in your opinion, Terry is only good for wiping arses with ..
>
> .. Bzzzt... .. you're talking out of your arse ..
>
> .. God you're a stupid fucker ..
>
> .. TMax, you're a fucking LIAR ..
>
> .. Bzzzzzzzttttttttttt.... Faulty reporting ..
>
> .. go ahead - make yourself look stupid ..
>
> .. With a sub-room temperature IQ, how could you be expected to know
> that? ..
> <unquote>
>
>
--
"However, you presuppose that certain numbers *are* prime ideals,
... when in fact ...* they are not... (Maybe I should look up 'prime
ideals' but the effort doesn't seem to be worth it. I assume some
poster will get excited ... if I messed up.)" --James Harris
Mr. Berserker
> Mr. Berserker threw some tea leaves on the floor
> and this is what they wrote:
>
> > Terry <tjpo...@gronk.porter.net> wrote in message news:<on6d21-...@gronk.porter.net>...
> >> Mr. Berserker threw some tea leaves on the floor
> >> and this is what they wrote:
> >>
> >> ><snip>
> >> >
> >> >> > Simon Cooke does not deserve any sympathy. Over the years
> >> >> > he has posted many hundreds of lies and insinuationss about
> >> >> > GNU/Linux and its creators. The only possible purpose of his
> >> >> > actions was to deceive people into not trying the software.
> >> >>
> >> >> <deletia>
> >> >>
> >> >> Agree with your analysis (as usual).
> >> >
> >> > I disagree with Mark Bilk.
> >>
> >> And I agree. His analysis over the years I have been here, has been
> >> right to the best of my recollection.
> >
> > I didn't mean: I always disagree with him. I simply don't want 'eye
> > for eye and tooth for tooth' policy.
>
> I'm not sure that Mark advocates that, and I certainly don't
> in *most* cases.
In extreme cases, sometimes it may be the only choice. I see you
partially agree on some point.
>
> >>
> >> > Though I may slam trolls, I have become
> >> > merciful over the years.
> >>
> >> Sadly the Wintrolls haven't had the same change of heart.
> >
> > Yes, that may be true, but consider Voltaire's philosophies.
>
> The closest to Voltaire's philosophies I have come, is the humble volt.
>
> >
> >>
> >> > "Let the one among you who is without sin
> >> > cast the first stone."
> >>
> >> Too religious for me.
> >
> > Well, I have no idea where you stand on religion but that is still a
> > good philosophy.
>
> I'm not religous, but it is a good philosophy, you're so right.
>
> >
> >>
> >> > After all, when Frodo Baggins and Samwise
> >> > Gamgee pitied Gollum, he eventually ended up destroying the One Ring.
> >>
> >> Only because after he had bitten of Frodo's finger to steal the ring
> >> away from him, Gollum fell into Mt Doom by accident.
> >
> > Yes, but the lesson of the day was pity.
>
> I didn't see it that way, I thought the lesson of the day was "watch
> out for lying deceitful hobbits whose hearts have been ruined beyond
> salvage by powerful forces beyond their understanding" ?
Well, "it was pity that stayed his hand" and some of the last words of
the Q.S. were about Morgoth: "for the acts of pity are beyond reckon
to the pitiless". I'M NOT COMPARING ANYONE TO MORGOTH, YOU LEAST OF
ALL. Tolkien seemed to believe in pity very much though. And remember
Elessar's forgiveness of the Orcs, the Easterlings, and the Black
Numenoreans.
Remember how IBM were? Well now they have thar muhammed ali
commercial... M$ could change for all we know.
>
>
> Hmm, I nearly typed "Wintroll" there instead of Hobbit.
>
> >As it was in the Quenta
> > Silmarillion.
>
> I'm not as nearly read as you I fear.
>
> >
> >>
> >> > Is Gollum as bad as $COoke; who knows? :)
> >>
> >> Gollums heart was black from years of association with the ring, he
> >> wasn't stupid.
> >
> > Just had poor grammar...Actually Simone is pretty smart. But he is
> > Proud and ignorant.
>
> I'd go along with that. However pride and ignorance are a good
> substitute for stupidity.
>
> A sad fact is that I'm not his enemy, I only hassle Wintrolls and the
> sooner Simon starts using his intelligence on Cola the sooner he can
> have a reasonable discussion with me.
Good one.
>
> >
> >>
> >> >
> >> > Seriously, I think it was extreme to destroy Kooke.
> >>
> >> He's not destroyed. Simon thought nothing of posting personal phone
> >> numbers of his opposition on line and someone (not me, I'm not an
> >> anonymous coward) posted his details on line.
> >>
> >> Tough.
> >>
> >> He got as good as he gave, and that's ok by me.
> >
> > It is not a good attitude to take...the world will not be mended by
> > acts of revenge.
>
>
> Actually I haven't supported any 'acts of revenge", because I believe
> that revenge is a wasted emotion, and it usually feeds on the one who
> has it.
>
> I feel that any honest action in response to being attacked, is
> allowable, it's up to the parties concerned.
>
> >>
> >> Simon has flounced off, but you can be sure he will be back, it's a
> >> little early to begin whipping yourself over him.
> >
> > I think he will too...
>
> And he is, under the guise of Milo T.
How did one tell that?? By the time he started posting? Could fartypus
be Simone?? :)
>
> Always a pleasure debating with you Mr Beserker, we may not agree at
> times, but I admire your style.
Welcome back, Terry.
Terry
and this is what they wrote:
> Terry <tjpo...@gronk.porter.net> wrote in message news:<9iov21-...@gronk.porter.net>...
>> Mr. Berserker threw some tea leaves on the floor
>> and this is what they wrote:
>>
>> > Terry <tjpo...@gronk.porter.net> wrote in message news:<on6d21-...@gronk.porter.net>...
>> >> Mr. Berserker threw some tea leaves on the floor
>> >> and this is what they wrote:
>> >>
>> >> ><snip>
>> >> >
>> >> >> > Simon Cooke does not deserve any sympathy. Over the years
>> >> >> > he has posted many hundreds of lies and insinuationss about
>> >> >> > GNU/Linux and its creators. The only possible purpose of his
>> >> >> > actions was to deceive people into not trying the software.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> <deletia>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Agree with your analysis (as usual).
>> >> >
>> >> > I disagree with Mark Bilk.
>> >>
>> >> And I agree. His analysis over the years I have been here, has been
>> >> right to the best of my recollection.
>> >
>> > I didn't mean: I always disagree with him. I simply don't want 'eye
>> > for eye and tooth for tooth' policy.
>>
>> I'm not sure that Mark advocates that, and I certainly don't
>> in *most* cases.
>
> In extreme cases, sometimes it may be the only choice. I see you
> partially agree on some point.
Naturally, we are both reasonable people :)
>
>>
>> >>
>> >> > Though I may slam trolls, I have become
>> >> > merciful over the years.
>> >>
>> >> Sadly the Wintrolls haven't had the same change of heart.
>> >
>> > Yes, that may be true, but consider Voltaire's philosophies.
>>
>> The closest to Voltaire's philosophies I have come, is the humble volt.
>>
>> >
>> >>
>> >> > "Let the one among you who is without sin
>> >> > cast the first stone."
>> >>
>> >> Too religious for me.
>> >
>> > Well, I have no idea where you stand on religion but that is still a
>> > good philosophy.
>>
>> I'm not religous, but it is a good philosophy, you're so right.
>>
>> >
>> >>
>> >> > After all, when Frodo Baggins and Samwise
>> >> > Gamgee pitied Gollum, he eventually ended up destroying the One Ring.
>> >>
>> >> Only because after he had bitten of Frodo's finger to steal the ring
>> >> away from him, Gollum fell into Mt Doom by accident.
>> >
>> > Yes, but the lesson of the day was pity.
>>
>> I didn't see it that way, I thought the lesson of the day was "watch
>> out for lying deceitful hobbits whose hearts have been ruined beyond
>> salvage by powerful forces beyond their understanding" ?
>
> Well, "it was pity that stayed his hand" and some of the last words of
> the Q.S. were about Morgoth: "for the acts of pity are beyond reckon
> to the pitiless". I'M NOT COMPARING ANYONE TO MORGOTH, YOU LEAST OF
> ALL. Tolkien seemed to believe in pity very much though.
Yes, I agree.
> And remember
> Elessar's forgiveness of the Orcs, the Easterlings, and the Black
> Numenoreans.
Um, no I don't actually, but I haven't read all of Tolkiens works.
>
> Remember how IBM were? Well now they have thar muhammed ali
> commercial... M$ could change for all we know.
I don't see MICROS~1 changing anytime soon, except perhaps to become a
"once was".
Power seems to corrupt all, and MICROS~1 is no exception.
>
>>
>>
>> Hmm, I nearly typed "Wintroll" there instead of Hobbit.
>>
>> >As it was in the Quenta
>> > Silmarillion.
>>
>> I'm not as nearly read as you I fear.
Opps how did that happen ? I meant that I'm not as well read as you.
It's Simon, same ISP, same newsreader.
Flatfish never used 40tude_Dialog/2.0.5.1, as he is a Forte Agent user.
He also never posted from 4.35.188.X
>
>>
>> Always a pleasure debating with you Mr Beserker, we may not agree at
>> times, but I admire your style.
>
> Welcome back, Terry.
Thanks :)