On Mon, Jan 02, 2012 at 08:31:14AM -0500, Jerry wrote: > On Sun, 1 Jan 2012 23:55:26 -0700 Chad Perrin articulated: > > On Sun, Jan 01, 2012 at 09:14:20AM -0500, Jerry wrote: > > > On Sun, 01 Jan 2012 22:56:45 +1000 Da Rock articulated: > > > > > > > > If you want to verify, then by all means parouse this list and > > > > others (even in the linux community) over the past _five_ (thats > > > > 5) years. > > > > > > I am not sure what "parouse" means. There are a Shane, Dawn and > > > Nicole Parouse. Are you referring to them? Perhaps you meant > > > "peruse". > > > > I think you had no doubt at all that "Da Rock" meant "peruse" here, > > and you should check whether the walls of your house are made of > > durable material before you start throwing stones. Check, for > > instance, you habitual inability to properly use apostrophes to > > indicate the possessive form of a word, or your error in using the > > plural form "phenomena" where the singular "phenomenon" is > > appropriate. These observations of your relative illiteracy come > > from a single paragraph, by the way, but until I saw your "play dumb > > to call someone dumb" approach to discussion, I felt it appropriate > > to point out your own failings along the same lines -- not because > > these specific failings invalidate anything else you say, but because > > you're kind of a mean-spirited little hypocrite. > > I specifically asked "Da Rock" in regards to "parouse" since I am not > familiar with what country he is from or what he considers his native > language. It is very possible that the word he used is native to his > region and therefore I wanted to inquire further.
I don't believe you. That's about the most cockamamie "oh innocent me" defense I've seen in a long time, especially given your history of trolling on this mailing list. > > Furthermore, before you make a complete ass of yourself, please check > out this URL: <http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/phenomena> http://education.yahoo.com/reference/dictionary/entry/phenomena . . . or, from your own choice of dictionary: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/phenomenon Did you see the word "nonstandard" on the page whose URI you provided? I'm not making an ass of myself. I'm pointing out where you have done so by using nonstandard or incorrect formulations (such as lack of apostrophes as indicia of possessiveness, thus once again using plural forms to mean something other than plurality) while jumping all over someone else's case for a misspelling. > > > > In short, trying to paint people who disagree with you in the colors > > of stupidity for a single spelling error when your errors are fairly > > numerous is not a winning strategy. > > Win what, I was not aware it was a game. Maybe that is the problem; you > are too busy playing games rather than actually completing bona fide > projects. I'm pretty sure even you are capable of understanding what I said, and are not literally confused about whether I'm referring to some kind of "game". It's also kinda interesting you're talking about me wasting time on this "game" you've invented that I must be playing rather than completing projects when you've just recently admitted you are wasting copious quantities of time trolling Polytropon, to the extent that you are mining years of mailing list archives in some kind of crusade to assassinate his character. I have zero interest in wasting anywhere near that much time on you, the way you are wasting so much time on him, and while I'm at it that looks a bit like someone obsessed with "winning" some kind of imagined contest. > > > > > > Ah, there we are. That good old socialist/fascist call to arms, > > > "You're either with us, or against us." > > > > I think the statement was more like "Someone who calls it 'open sore' > > is clearly a mean-spirited jackass who likes making trouble," rather > > than "Down with the bourgeoisie!" I just figured I'd help clarify. > > Now you have really peaked my interest. On any given day, on a Windows > based forum, the terms: "FreePiss", open-sore", "Lsuck" etcetera are > freely thrown around. On Linux based forums, terms like: "Winblows", > "Microsucks", etcetera are freely used. Would you please be so kind as > to explain to me why it is morally correct to use one set of terms but > not the other? It is either right or it is wrong. You cannot be > slightly pregnant. I personally find such terms morally repugnant; > however, since they are commonly used on this forum it appears that they > are socially acceptable. Would you not concur or are you going to try > and bullshit your way out of this one? 1. I didn't say it was "morally correct" to use one set of derogatory forms and "morally incorrect" to use the other. You are attributing arguments to me I never made. 2. I don't even use terms like "winblows" and "Microsucks". I don't even say "M$". I refer to Microsoft Windows OSes as "Microsoft Windows OSes", or sometimes "MS Windows OSes", or something along those lines. Trying to make me out to be a bad person for things other people have done is no way to do your arguments any favors. 3. While I don't condone "winblows" and "Microsucks" per se, at least such statements are directed at technology and a vendor that produces that technology, whereas your use of terms like "open sore" is clearly a direct attack on the people with whom you are speaking by referring to what you imagine to be their feelings and attitudes -- a move that seems like it could only reasonably arise by design, in a mean-spirited attempt to personally offend the people to whom you are speaking. It would be akin to someone saying not "people who use winblows like you", but "winblowers like you", implying unsavory things about your relationship to MS Windows and bypassing any potential for gainful discussion. It proves nothing about the person to whom you are speaking, but seems to pretty strongly indicate your own motivations have nothing to do with reasonability or rational discussion. . . . and I don't see anyone else calling you "socialist" or "fascist" or "mercantilist" or "capitalist swine" or anything like that, either. What's your excuse for the "socialist/fascist" canard? > > I have a morbid hatred of those who suffer from decidophobia. However, > after restudying the matter, I think it more likely that the real > problem is an irrational fear of success. If only Microsoft was able to > accomplish things like easily getting a printer fully functional under > its environment, making sound or video or wireless cards work without > in all too many cases resorting to draconian measures, and the list > goes on, I would agree with you. However, we (and by we I am assuming > that you haven't got your head buried so far up your ass that you are > not aware of what is transpiring on other Operating Systems) are both > aware that, that is not the case. Linux in general and Ubuntu in > particular have made huge strides in making computers easier to use and > opening up the path for better, easier and more advanced software to be > installed. Ubuntu, actually, has thrown out the baby with the bathwater. In its zeal to make things "just work" in a particular manner, it seems hell-bent on ignoring all but one way to do things, even as it tries to dominate its entire market niche to the extent that it eclipses and marginalizes alternatives. In this respect, it is very much emulating the MS Windows you seem to admire so much (at least in contrast to FreeBSD). While this makes Ubuntu more useful for specific subsets of the user base, it also makes it much less useful for many, many others. It only gets worse when it makes dramatic changes before the software is ready not just for prime time, but for beta testing -- thus taking up Microsoft's tactic of doing testing on people who expect a finished, polished product with its core offering. On the plus side, Ubuntu at least is not costing people license fees for the privilege of testing. The real hell of it is that by leading a charge toward adopting the policies of MS Windows development in the open source Unix-like operating system world, it is not marginalizing other ways of doing things in service to providing something that does not already exist. It is increasingly trying to be a better Microsoft Windows, while pretending to be a better Unix. I understand the value of a "just works" system, and if Ubuntu and MS Windows both lived up to that standard as well as they and their loyal users pretend, I would be happy for them (as far as that goes), but things are not quite as rosy as they all pretend -- just as things are not quite as rosy with FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD, Slackware, Debian, and Arch Linux as their communities pretend at times (though they are presented as "rosy", and fail to be so "rosy", in very different ways from Ubuntu and MS Windows). I am willing to put in a couple extra minutes making configuration decisions to get a system where I tell it how I want to work instead of it telling me how I'm going to work; I am willing to do some of my own automation in exchange for a system that is more stable; I am willing to learn about my options in order to have options. Others take the opposite approach: they are willing to let the vendor dictate how they will use a system so they can go directly to using it rather than customizing it at all; they are willing to deal with periodic instability so they can have more stuff pre-automated; they are willing to give up options to avoid having to make decisions they regard as irrelevant to their lives (which I find odd, given how increasingly much of our lives we spend in front of computers, but they're welcome to that choice if that's what they want). In short, it's a trade-off, and it's why I prefer FreeBSD over Ubuntu. It's also why I regard your trolling this FreeBSD mailing list to spread such bile about FreeBSD, claiming that Ubuntu is the Right Way for all open source software as a disciple of the Microsoft way of doing things, utterly inappropriate and wrong-headed. > > There is a commonly held truism, "If you are not the lead dog of the > pack, the view never changes." Now if you are happy playing "follow the > leader" and watch their balls dangle in your face, then fine. > Personally, I want to be in the lead. As soon as anyone steps up and > remarks about FreeBSD's standing in the desktop market, they are > immediately met with the "Blame the {fill in the blank}" choir. I am > now officially renaming that the "Sour Grapes Posse". You seem to think everyone is traveling in the same direction, but to the extent FreeBSD travels in a direction that suits my needs rather than those of Technologically Uninclined Ubuntu User #7, it appears to be beating its own path rather than following anothers. Greater popularity is not, after all, an indicator that something is leading something else. It's just an indicator that the direction it's going is a popular direction. You don't have to be the most popular to serve a niche, a need, that has a valid place in the world -- and you don't have to refer to crude metaphors in explicit and offensive terms to make a well reasoned point. You can "rename" a community however you like, but if you cannot see how that contributes to the general perception that you are nothing but an offensive troll out to force-feed your own sour grapes to the rest of us, you're stupider than I expected. . . . and that's definitely the biggest case of me taking a troll's bait that has come up in quite a while. I expect to regret the wasted time I could have been spending on tidying up some gaming software enough to make it look nice for others' use. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] _______________________________________________ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
