On 3 Feb 2014 16:44, "Andreas Kuckartz" <a.kucka...@ping.de> wrote: > > Claudiu Curcă: > > 1. Why is that comment classified as "XMPP bashing"? > > As far as I know Daniel is mostly an SIP guy and is trying to _help_ the > XMPP community by pointing to that comment. But I also do not think that > the comment is "bashing" anything. >
It's making statements of fact which are incorrect, and using those to justify a strong statement of opinion. > > why is the comment interesting to the operators group? > > The comment states that XMPP "lacks a protocol-level acknowledge and > I've seen it loose messages regularly when running through flaky proxy" > > It certainly is possible to reply to that without taking up arms. And I have. Dave.
