informationweek.com misquots Groklaw .. - Linux

This is a discussion on informationweek.com misquots Groklaw .. - Linux ; A journalist for informationweek.com takes some swipes at PJ .. "A misleading article appeared Monday on an anti-SCO Web site called Groklaw run by a blogger who calls him or herself 'Pamela Jones.'" Notice how in the first point he ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: informationweek.com misquots Groklaw ..

  1. informationweek.com misquots Groklaw ..

    A journalist for informationweek.com takes some swipes at PJ ..

    "A misleading article appeared Monday on an anti-SCO Web site called
    Groklaw run by a blogger who calls him or herself 'Pamela Jones.'"

    Notice how in the first point he does a fuddie and creatively clips out
    the preceding part of the quote ..

    'PM: "The free software world spent the weekend celebrating…"
    'PJ': "Free software was never in the SCO saga."'

    He then goes on to quote PJ from Dec 2003 totally out on context ..

    'Groklaw, Dec. 20, 2003: "I noticed an article on something called the
    Free Software Act, which is currently being drafted by the Free Software
    Consortium Legal Governing Body. I was interested to note that some
    brain power is going into figuring out a way to prevent any future
    SCO-like events."'

    http://www.informationweek.com/blog/...klaws_pam.html

    Now lets see the actual quote in context ..

    'The free software world spent the weekend celebrating after a judge
    nixed SCO's ownership claims over Unix and, by extension, Linux. But the
    ruling did not specifically address SCO's charge that Linux is a Unix
    knock off--and a case that could have settled that question for good may
    now fade away as a result of Friday's decision', Paul McDougall

    'No. It's the Linux world that was celebrating. Free software was
    never in the SCO saga, although I'm sure everyone is happy. It's been
    about the Linux kernel, the SCO claims, not free software. Also, SCO
    never had any ownership rights in Linux, only a claim that it had found
    some Unix System V code in there, which it would never identify to the
    kernel guys so they could remove it, and judging by what has been filed
    in the IBM case might just be nothing at all', PJ

    http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?s...07081316171269

    I assume the rest of the article is to the same journalistic standards ..

    --

    doing a fuddie:

    Selectively misquoting or answering an imaginary point ..

  2. Re: informationweek.com misquots Groklaw ..


    "Doug Mentohl" wrote in message
    news:feieuj$o2q$1@news.datemas.de...
    >A journalist for informationweek.com takes some swipes at PJ ..
    >
    > "A misleading article appeared Monday on an anti-SCO Web site called
    > Groklaw run by a blogger who calls him or herself 'Pamela Jones.'"
    >
    > Notice how in the first point he does a fuddie and creatively clips out
    > the preceding part of the quote ..
    >
    > 'PM: "The free software world spent the weekend celebrating…"
    > 'PJ': "Free software was never in the SCO saga."'
    >
    > He then goes on to quote PJ from Dec 2003 totally out on context ..
    >
    > 'Groklaw, Dec. 20, 2003: "I noticed an article on something called the
    > Free Software Act, which is currently being drafted by the Free Software
    > Consortium Legal Governing Body. I was interested to note that some brain
    > power is going into figuring out a way to prevent any future SCO-like
    > events."'
    >
    > http://www.informationweek.com/blog/...klaws_pam.html
    >
    > Now lets see the actual quote in context ..
    >
    > 'The free software world spent the weekend celebrating after a judge nixed
    > SCO's ownership claims over Unix and, by extension, Linux. But the ruling
    > did not specifically address SCO's charge that Linux is a Unix knock
    > off--and a case that could have settled that question for good may now
    > fade away as a result of Friday's decision', Paul McDougall
    >
    > 'No. It's the Linux world that was celebrating. Free software was
    > never in the SCO saga, although I'm sure everyone is happy. It's been
    > about the Linux kernel, the SCO claims, not free software. Also, SCO never
    > had any ownership rights in Linux, only a claim that it had found some
    > Unix System V code in there, which it would never identify to the kernel
    > guys so they could remove it, and judging by what has been filed in the
    > IBM case might just be nothing at all', PJ
    >
    > http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?s...07081316171269
    >
    > I assume the rest of the article is to the same journalistic standards ..
    >


    After reading the fine article at:
    http://www.informationweek.com/blog/...klaws_pam.html

    It's clear that Jones is a lying zealot just like most other so called
    "linux advocates." Nothing but shameless lies from that two-faced b*tch.





    --
    Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com


  3. Re: informationweek.com misquots Groklaw ..

    In article <470d29e6$0$26360$88260bb3@free.teranews.com>,
    "Randy Oaks" wrote:
    > After reading the fine article at:
    > http://www.informationweek.com/blog/...klaws_pam.html
    >
    > It's clear that Jones is a lying zealot just like most other so called
    > "linux advocates." Nothing but shameless lies from that two-faced b*tch.


    That was amusing. For those who haven't read it, basically what he does
    is take things from his first story, followed by Groklaw's criticism of
    those things, and for most of those, he then quotes earlier things from
    Gloklaw that agreed with him, thus catching Groklaw in a vast number of
    contradictions.

    --
    --Tim Smith

  4. Re: informationweek.com misquots Groklaw ..

    After takin' a swig o' grog, DFS belched out this bit o' wisdom:

    >> Microsoft pretty much deserves the reactions they get.

    >
    > Not even close to the absurdities and whines posted here and elsewhere in
    > Linux la-la land. Most of the griping comes from powerless, broke, vengeful
    > Linux weenies who resent going to work and having to use Windows to make a
    > living.


    There's some gratuitous griping here, of course. But the documented stuff
    out there is incredible enough.

    > (though MS is too large and powerful for my tastes as well)


    Ballmer's really been beating his chest and tossing up the gorilla dust
    lately.

    --
    "Kreegah! Bundolo Linux!"
    -- Steve Ballmer, CEO, Microsoft

  5. Re: informationweek.com misquots Groklaw ..

    After takin' a swig o' grog, Randy Oaks belched out this bit o' wisdom:

    > After reading the fine article at:
    > http://www.informationweek.com/blog/...klaws_pam.html
    >
    > It's clear that Jones is a lying zealot just like most other so called
    > "linux advocates." Nothing but shameless lies from that two-faced b*tch.


    Slacker. Why the asterisk? Afraid to complete the insult?


+ Reply to Thread