Linux-Advocacy Digest #407, Volume #29 Mon, 2 Oct 00 21:13:08 EDT
Contents:
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (Loren
Petrich)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (Loren
Petrich)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (Loren
Petrich)
Re: [OT] Public v. Private Schools (Loren Petrich)
Re: Windows+Linux+MacOS = BeOS (.)
Re: Windows+Linux+MacOS = BeOS ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: [ CORRECTION ] Re: The real issue ("Joseph T. Adams")
Re: Linux to equal NT 3.51???? ("James E. Freedle II")
Job Opportunities with Linux based Company ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: The real issue ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: How low can they go...? (T. Max Devlin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Loren Petrich)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
Date: 2 Oct 2000 19:10:45 -0400
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
STATIC66 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 25 Aug 2000 16:55:12 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
>wrote:
>>On Fri, 25 Aug 2000 11:30:58 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>>>> 2. Defense Expenditures
>>>Legitimate spending...Constitutionally MANDATED, in fact.
>>But the constitution doesn't say anything about "how much". For example,
>>it would be difficult to argue that cutting the defence budget by 90%
>>is "unconstitutional.
>90%?? what kind of pinko are you ??
Cry me a river. Mr. Rebbechi is absolutely right. In fact, George
Washington, in his Farewell Address, warned about such things as deficit
spending, standing armies, and foreign entanglements.
>Clinton has decimated our military strength and moral (I saw it first
>hand). it can't take anymore. Make no mistake about it, it protects
>YOUR freedoms..
I thought that you anti-statists would be jumping for joy at
seeing a defanged government.
>>>> 3. Social Security
>>>Unconstitutional. END IT NOW.
>>Based on what ? Your opinion ? The opinions that count, legal opinions of
>>those better qualified than yourself seem to contradict this.
>SOCIALISM
Nowhere does the Constitution mention that word.
>>>> 4. Medicare
>>>Unconstitutional. END IT NOW.
>>See above.
>SOCIALISM
Nowhere does the Constitution mention that word.
--
Loren Petrich
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Happiness is a fast Macintosh
And a fast train
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Loren Petrich)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
Date: 2 Oct 2000 19:12:31 -0400
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
STATIC66 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>The truth is that the public schools are being used for entirely too
>much social experimentation,and environmental leftist propaganda. I
>see it every day first hand. My wife and I are discussing sending the
>kids to a private school it is so bad.
And what do you mean by that???
--
Loren Petrich
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Happiness is a fast Macintosh
And a fast train
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Loren Petrich)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
Date: 2 Oct 2000 19:15:48 -0400
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
STATIC66 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Do you work in a technical field?? The majority of the "top echelon"
>engineers are immigrants.
But why are they so competent if they come from evil socialist
hellholes??? There is a SERIOUS contradiction there.
--
Loren Petrich
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Happiness is a fast Macintosh
And a fast train
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Loren Petrich)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Public v. Private Schools
Date: 2 Oct 2000 19:36:58 -0400
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>This is why you Europeans buy into socialism.
>Economics is NOT a zero-sum game.
However, most objections to taxation are pure zero-sumism: that
the government getting tax money means the taxpayers losing money.
And if lowering taxes is good, why not have universal negative
taxation -- the government giving out money to everybody???
--
Loren Petrich
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Happiness is a fast Macintosh
And a fast train
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Subject: Re: Windows+Linux+MacOS = BeOS
Date: 2 Oct 2000 23:36:30 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On 2 Oct 2000 21:58:53 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>> On 2 Oct 2000 18:43:01 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>>>> On 30 Sep 2000 06:42:04 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>>Ingemar Lundin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> skrev i meddelandet
>>>>>>> news:8r32b1$12ai$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>>>>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> [deletia]
>>>>BeOS actually is *perfect* for pulling betacam signal, dumping it to a small
>>>>drive array, compressing it into mpg, rv, AND avi on the fly and subsequently
>>>>pushing it to a huge solaris streaming video server cluster with a total from-
>>>>live buffer of about 6 seconds.
>>>>
>>>>But you probably wouldnt have known that.
>>
>>> QNX would be even better.
>>>
>>
>>There are no QNX drivers for 128mb Elsa style cards with natural betacam
>>ins.
> ...and they exist for BeOS? That would certainly be
> an interesting pattern of sparseness...
They do indeed. Sparseness? We're talking about exceedingly specialized
application here. Windows doesnt cut it; its to bloated and unstable.
Linux doesnt cut it, its too much of a hassle to fix when it does break
(which admittedly isnt very often), plus there are no drivers for it.
=====.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Windows+Linux+MacOS = BeOS
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2000 23:41:06 GMT
I don't usually agree with Nathaniel, but I do respect his opinion
which he generally uses reasonable arguments to defend, unlike you who
resort to rhymes and riddles and twisted examples of the english
language all in a desperate effort to defend your poor position,but in
this case he (Mr. Lee) is right on the mark.
I'm glad you are not a Windows advocate jedi :(
You do more harm to the Linux community than you realize.
Try arguing a specific point someday.
claire
On Mon, 02 Oct 2000 22:10:05 -0000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>On Mon, 02 Oct 2000 20:51:47 -0000, Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> spoke thusly:
>>>On Mon, 02 Oct 2000 16:02:26 -0000, Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> spoke thusly:
>>>>>On Fri, 29 Sep 2000 20:53:59 -0000, Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> spoke thusly:
>>>>>>>On 29 Sep 2000 19:11:51 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>All bets are off when booting into Personal Edition from Windows,
>>>>>>>>>>however. Stick to Pro, and don't use the Windows boot option.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Why should where you boot it from matter? Why should a weak
>>>>>>>>> filesystem make an OS more unstable? It is after all an official
>>>>>>>>> version from Be rather than something cobbled together by two
>>>>>>>>> junior high students.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Ever run linux on a completely fat32 filesystem?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That still doesn't answer the question. What is inherent in
>>>>>>> a FAT filesystem that implies that you should expect the
>>>>>>> system to crash more?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It doesn't just get that way by magic or fairy dust. There's
>>>>>>> a reason for it that can be determined and explained.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>It doesn't fully shut down the system and come up in BeOS
>>>>>
>>>>> What exactly is lingering around to provide problems for
>>>>> the new kernel? Should you trust an OS that doesn't
>>>>> completely flush the state of the system once it takes
>>>>> control?
>>>>
>>>>It's meant as a demo. You can't really do much with the
>>>
>>> IOW: it's a big fat ad.
>>>
>>> As such, it reflects upon the full version. If this
>>> "well, it's really just a demo" version is percieved
>>> as a piece of shit than it will certainly reflect
>>> badly on Be and "real BeOS".
>>>
>>>>'Personal' edition. As such, it is meant to provide you
>>>>with a basic idea of what the final system will run like.
>>>>
>>>>You would not be trusting the personal edition for much of
>>>>'real' use as it doesn't provide you with a lot of data
>>>>storage capabilities and it doesn't really give you a lot
>>>>of the options of the full version. I'm not sure about
>>>>installing apps on it, as I've never tried installing
>>>>anything more on the personal edition, only on the Pro.
>>>
>>> Demos aren't an excuse to be sloppy.
>>>
>>
>>Hell, it's worked for Microsoft for the past 25 years,
>>even in the non-demo shit.
>>
>>I do use Linux, and enjoy it fully. But seeing people
>>like you makes me feel like the entire idea of the 'Linux
>>Community' is nothing more pleasurable than a baseball bat
>>covered with spiked being shoved up my ass.
>
> Simple curative: don't be an idiot.
>
>[deletia]
>
> Corel botching their version of Linux isn't quite like
> Be bowing to their marketing department and seriously
> undermining the integrity of their operating system.
>
> This kind of BS is why people like me AVOID Microsoft.
>
> If Be screws up, their actions shouldn't be overlooked
> just because they aren't Microsoft.
>
------------------------------
From: "Joseph T. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [ CORRECTION ] Re: The real issue
Date: 2 Oct 2000 23:42:58 GMT
Roberto Selbach Teixeira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: I don't think Microsoft is the issue. Why is it using Microsoft Word
: any different from using Corel Wordperfect? Both are proprietary
: software, aren't they? Microsoft just manages to have a bigger share,
: that is all.
I agree that we should not patronize vendors of proprietary software
if at all possible.
But Microsoft is a particularly vexing problem because so many
unsophisticated users have been brainwashed into believing that
whatever shoddy pile of crap Microsoft sells constitutes a "standard,"
rather than the single biggest reason why there are no useful
standards in any of the markets it controls.
: Fighting agains Microsoft is useless. If Microsoft happens to fall, we
: will still have people using CorelDraw or Adobe Photoshop and all
: that. So how is this going to help?
: The issue is not using proprietary software. Simple.
Even among proprietary software vendors, relatively few have
demonstrated the crass insistence upon destruction of other people's
property upon which Microsoft prides itself.
But, fundamentally, you are very correct. Free software is about
freedom, more than any other single thing. If we are not free over
the information we produce, and the tools we use to manipulate and add
value to it, then we are not free at all, especially now that
information has become the foundation for much of the world's economy
as well as its culture.
I go to great lengths to avoid most proprietary software. Currently
only Netscape and Star Office remain on my machine, and only because
both of them are becoming free. OTOH I don't mind paying for
hardware, free software, support, and other services for companies
that are friendly to free software.
My business plan once called for developing proprietary software.
Thanks to the work of Richard Stallman, Eric Raymond, and various
others, I've decided that it would be wrong and counterproductive to
do so under any circumstances I can conceive. I don't want to take
over the world. I do want to make an honest and decent living, but if
I do so at the expense of the freedom of other people, by assenting to
"laws" that say it is illegal for them to copy and share bits and
bytes they have paid me money for, "laws" that cannot be enforced
without an oppressive police state, then how honest or decent is that?
If I hold users hostage, forbidding them access to their own data
unless they pay me some arbitrary amount each year or two for
"upgrades," then how am I any better than any other proprietary
software vendor?
I'm not quite sure how I'll make my living in an open-source world.
But hopefully it will be by empowering users, and adding to their
freedom, rather than limiting and oppressing them.
Joe
------------------------------
From: "James E. Freedle II" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux to equal NT 3.51????
Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 20:05:01 -0400
Really did not know what the heck was on the CDs and still after I was done,
I still could not consistantly set it up. So I got VMWare and decided to
keep it there until I have figured it out.
"David M. Butler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> James E. Freedle II wrote:
>
> > I can tell you, I can get everything done with Windows, and I have yet
to
> > get Linux to work with my hardware, and of course it takes 3× as long to
> > setup the system as it does in Windows.
>
> I dunno 'bout hardware, but my Linux system took about 20 minutes to set
> up. That was the time it took for Mandrake to install. After that it was
> a matter of 10 seconds to click on the services I didn't want to start
when
> I booted (web server and such), and a couple minutes to go to a firewall
> script generating site that sets up all the security I need on a dialup.
> So the total was about 25 minutes and 10 seconds, about the same it takes
> me to install Windows 98.
>
> Hardware can be a bitch tho, depending on what you have.
>
> D. Butler
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Job Opportunities with Linux based Company
Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2000 00:13:54 GMT
I am currently recruiting for a start up in Mountain View,CA that
intends to help make Linux the desktop of choice for millions of people.
They have created a user-interface software and system management
services that will speed the adoption of Linux on the desktop. They
were recognized by Red Herring as one of the "Ten to Watch". Currently
they need Software Project Managers with a strong understanding of the
development process of system level software as well as experience
developing or deploying high volume web sites. They are also in need of
Quality Assurance Engineers.
If this sounds like an opportunity that you would like to explore
further, please respond to this posting and send along your resume so we
can find out if this is a match for your skill set. Or feel free to
call 415-865-3699. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: The real issue
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2000 00:36:13 GMT
On Mon, 02 Oct 2000 22:02:41 -0000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>On Mon, 02 Oct 2000 20:49:27 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>>On Mon, 02 Oct 2000 20:05:21 -0000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>>
>>>On Mon, 02 Oct 2000 19:54:47 GMT, Kolbjørn S. Brønnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>>>
>>>>>On Mon, 02 Oct 2000 17:01:16 GMT, Kolbjørn S. Brønnick
>>>>
>>>>SNIP
>>>>
>>>>>>I don't think so. I'm not pro Microsoft at all.
>>>>>
>>>>> Bullshit. You're claiming that MS has the best desktop
>>>>> and all the best apps. You can't get MUCH more pro
>>>>> Microsoft than that.
>>>>
>>>>I think it is foolish to advocate Linux based on false premises. That was
>>>>the issue I was raising. As a desktop OS, W2K is superior for most users
>>>>IMO. I didn't mention other systems, only W2K and Linux.
>>>
>>> Then what is behind that opinion besides vapor?
>>
>>How about applications?
>>Got anything like MusicMatch Jukebox?
>
> You mean in terms of features or in it's apparent attempt
> to seem like some sort of embedded device? Those sort of
> features are quite adequately addressed by quite a few
> Linux apps actuall.
One, very good application, does it all and quite well. Linux has no
alternative except to use 10 different, disjointed and non interacting
applications. None of which works as well as even the most basic
Windows equivilant application.
Pyro is another example (www.cakewalk.com).
>>Out of the box, run it and it works firewall like BlackIce or Norton?
>>Wordperfect suite that runs NATIVELY under it's own OS instead of some
>>Wine hack?
>
> There are two major versions of Wordperfect that run natively
> under Unix actually. Although, as many Lemmings pick on WP
> I'm not quite so sure that running natively under Win32 would
> be such a big plus for WinDOS users.
Point is YOUR beloved Linux version of Wordperfect Office is a
hack..And a bad one at that... The screen fonts are painful, and even
the ultimate Linux guru Petretley admits as much.
So is the Linux distribution produced by Corel. At least they are
consistent in producing garbage.
>>Actually remembering the directory that contains the files needed by
>>the applications. Example: MMJB starts right up in my music directory
>>where my 100 gig or so of files are stored. XMMS requires me telling
>>it where to go every time. This seems typical of Linux applications.
>
> My entire mp3 archive (~10G) is accessable from my "start menu",
> so I would never be in the position to need to worry about this
> sort of thing.
Sure 5 mouse clicks away, or a couple of text files pointing to the
location of your mp3's.
Of course you'll have to do the same thing for CCDB or Playlists, or
scanning your system for new mp3's and so forth.
Try a real mp3 program like mmjb sometime and you will understand what
you are missing, or more bluntly what crap you are putting up with.
http://www.musicmatch.com/
should get you started.
>>Like help under most applications, including kde, posting a message
>>like "I'm still working on the help file" try again later...
>
> If you felt the need to consult one, the whole point of that
> GUI became moot anyways. So, you say that you find yourself
> needing and getting lots of help from the online documentation
> in that paradigm GUI Windows?
Bullshit. How many non-Linux folks can figure out how to add a
shortcut to a kde/gnome/windowmaker or god help them an ice or fwvm
menu?
Windows online doc is good. Linux doc stinks, unless you like looking
at outdated, generic ("you might try something like xxxxx") How-to's.
>
>>
>>
>>> For simple desktop use, NT5 is no better and Win9x isn't much better.
>>
>>Easily editing start menu, creating icons for applications, icons that
>
> My startmenu editor works just swimmingly actually. My application
> icons get created AUTOMATICALLY. Those that don't benefit from the
> fact that I don't need to know where a program is to run it (unlike
> in DOS).
The Linux programs that actually install an icon for you, point you to
a readme file and generally act in a user friendly manner are far and
few between. Most require that you look at the rpm to find the
exectable/doc etc.
At one point both StarOffice and Wordperfect 8 both had entries in
their FAQ explaining how to start the program you just installed.
I installed both under Caldera 2.2 and couldn't figure out how to
start either, not to mention the idiotic StarOffice license agreement
that becomes screwed up if you so much as change a letter in your
name.
More pathetic Linux crap.
>>are automatically added when applications are installed, consistent
>
> You must have a really cluttered desktop.
You can tell the application where you want it installed. Unlike Linux
which 90 percent of the time doesn't even install an icon and leaves
it up to the user to figure what the arcane command of the month
actually starts the program.
Pan, slrn,ImWheel add icons under all Wm's?
Shit even switching wm's under a given distribution Mandrake for
example, gives grossly different applications in the menues. Some are
there under one WM and not under another.
A complete mess......
>>drag and drop. A file manager that doesn't take eternity to search for
>>a program. The list goes on and on.
>
> There is simply no NEED to "search" for a program in Unix.
Sure, that's because if it's a program that actually accomplishes
something the average folks want to do, it probably doesn't exist.
You do have editors by the gross though...
Compiler interfaces also...
God I LOVE compiling my kernel....Gives me a real rush....
>>
>>>>
>>>>Lots of Windows users will be disappointed when they find that the Linux
>>>>desktop experience is not as smooth as they expected and that apps like
>>>>Wordperfect and Netscape are slow and crash-prone compared to the Windows
>>>>alternatives. Sure, Linux experts can achieve anything with ease using
>>>
>>> Now you're just repeating the same old Netscape-crash-crash
>>> mantra. Compared to the Win32 alternatives, Netscape actually
>>> isn't that bad.
>>
>>It's terrible, Netscape that is, and ironic that the OS that powers a
>
> It's not that bad compared to the primary competition.
Yes it is, and even your Linux penguin-pals will agree. You are just
too blind to see the truth.
>>lot of the internet has such a poor excuse for a browser. IE blows
>>Netscrape out of the water, as long as you keep up with it's security
>>flaws :)
>
> No it doesn't. It has it's own problems. This is even more
> remarkable considering that Microsoft is actually free to
> fund it's development. IE is actually a rather pathetic
> showing considering the context.
Netscape sucks, and even the Windows advocates will agree. Nobody uses
Netscape unless they have to. Unfortunately, if you want a decent
Linux GUI based browser, Netscape is the only game in town, so maybe
to YOU it is ok.
>>
>>Opera 4.0 under Windows is a mess. Try it and see for yourself.
>>
>>> Wordperfect also isn't the only word processor available.
>>
>>But it's really the only commercial competitor to Word, even under
>
> Why aren't the others?
They are unable to translate MS docs properly, tables, spreadsheets,
embedded graphics etc. Wordperfect does the best job, even under
Windows.
Check StarOffices homepage to find out how many MS features it can't
translate and all of the legal escape clauses to that effect.
>[deletia]
>
> Please do give the reasons for each, assuming you even
> know what they are...
I know full well what they are and they have been mentioned ad-nauseam
here. I won't waste cycles on your zealot Bullshit.
YOU are the one having to hack around using an albeit stable
infrastructure, with a half assed applications support. Me I prefer
well chosen applications, of which I have hundreds of choices, and
this in and of itself guarantees me a stable system.
Come back and spout your twisted version of the english dialect when
you have some applications that people actually want to use.
Pete Goodwin was right, Linux lags far behind Windows.....
claire
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How low can they go...?
Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2000 20:48:34 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Jonathan Revusky in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
[...]
>But Max, what *you* find more or less tolerable is not at issue here,
>since *you* were not on the receiving end of the libellous statements.
Of course it is. I'm trying to be a reasonable person, and what a
reasonable person finds tolerable is precisely the issue. Its the only
guide we have for being able to tell whether anything anyone is posting
is true or not; reason.
>Now, if I understand you correctly, you seem to think that participating
>in this kind of forum more or less obliges you to put up with
>accusations of pedophilia, for example -- roughly in the same way that
>you have to put up with the presence of insects on a camping trip...
Well, that depends entirely on what you mean by 'more or less obliged to
put up with'. I don't believe I've said you must 'put up' with them,
but that some tolerance for the fact that any jackwad can post any damn
thing they want on Usenet without editorial review is pretty much the
nature of the forum, when it comes down to it. I'm not one of those who
try to say that its alright to act unreasonably on Usenet, yet I don't
believe that we can simply demand conformance with a single formal set
of rules. Since anyone can present any identity they want on Usenet,
whether someone is even posting anonymously is not the entirety of the
issue. Am I saying you're going to have to 'put up with' the
possibility that someone might post lies about you. Yes. Like ants at
a picnic, they may not be the point of an outdoor meal, but they are a
common feature.
>Well, other people's opinions may differ and they will act accordingly.
>By most normal standards, this is *not* the kind of thing people should
>have to put up with to discuss technology with their professional peers.
>It may be that in this usenet context, it has become so normal that many
>regular participants are completely inured to it. That does not make it
>"normal" in any broader sense. It's really pretty darned abnormal.
I never said it was normal to post lies. You're seeking a false
dichotomy, where one side is right and the other therefore wrong. The
ethical question resolves to whether breaking the posters anonymity was
called for, within the circumstances and context. I'd have to say the
jury's still out on that, as a 'broad sense'. Whether you feel
justified is entirely a separate issue.
><rest snipped because I'm really tired now, some concerning who is more
>credible and how you judge that>
>
>Oh, and as for your points concerning who has more credibility
>etcetera... look, you can observe carefully, and I think that you'll
>discover that, whatever else you end up thinking of me, my discourse is
>pretty meticulously truthful. The people I argue with, for the most part
>-- James Robertson in this particular instance being an example -- are
>not so meticulously truthful. For example, I sent you material in
>private that should have provided some insight into the extent to which
>James, in this instance, was misrepresenting what happened prior to that
>point in the debate.
I don't recall how accurate James' representation was, but I have tried
not to fault either your or his credibility out of hand. I would point
out that you make my point by continuing to discuss this with me, while
James, as you've noted he might characteristically do, simply avoided
the argument. That is certainly a point in your favor, but there isn't
any 'magic number' which will conclusively shed light on whether he was
backing the wrong horse in a troll-war, or pointing out ethical
considerations which you weren't willing to face, such as whether it is
appropriate to 'out' an anonymous poster because you don't like what he
says, whether about you or anyone else, whether true or not. I have to
admit it seems a ludicrous position to try to defend, but I always go
back to the point that, given the ability to establish a false identity
as an even less honest form of anonymity, to suppose that trying to
force everyone to post under their real identity (which I don't
necessarily oppose, but don't find it possible in the current context),
and worse to trade a presumption of privacy to enforce the principle by
'outing' someone to their employer is not a reasonable approach.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
======USENET VIRUS=======COPY THE URL BELOW TO YOUR SIG==============
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.advocacy) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
