REAL COLA STATS: Saturday the 20th of October, 2007

Toplist of Dumbest Posters


1. Bob Hauck
2. Roy Schestowitz
3. Peter Kai JensOn
4. Roy Culley (various nyms)
5. Mark Kent
6. [H]omer
7. Kelsey Bjarnason
8. TheLetterK
9. Gregory Shearman
10. [email]roys.testicals@gmail.com[/email]


Note #1: All stats are generated completely inside my brain.
Note #2: Dumbness is measured as (propensity to spew bull**** *
denials + lies - moments of clarity)/pi
Note #3: This list should be taken as fact, and any denial as such
will almost certainly warrant inclusion on the list.

Micoshaft's Asstroturfer cc wrote on behalf of Micoshaft Corporation:
[color=blue]
> T[/color]

Toplist of Dumbest Asstroturfing Posters trolling COLA

1. cc
2. Flat skate
3. Doofu
4. Ear Wax
6. Micoshaft Corporation Paid Asstroturfers who can't count

Note #1: All stats are generated completely by paid Micoshaft Asstroturfers.
Note #2: Dumbness is measured as (propensity to spew bull**** *
denials + lies - moments of clarity)/pi
Note #3: This list should be taken as fact, and any denial as such
will almost certainly warrant inclusion on the list.
Note #4: If that didn't work, you will have to sit in front of a Pista
Machines for 69 whole hours responding to [Allow, Deny] prompts.
Warning: Claiming to have gone insane to cop out before 69th hour
does not count.

In comp.os.linux.advocacy, cc
<scatnubbs@hotmail.com>
wrote
on Sat, 20 Oct 2007 21:44:39 -0000
<1192916679.894954.146740@t8g2000prg.googlegroups.com>:[color=blue]
> Toplist of Dumbest Posters
>
>
> 1. Bob Hauck
> 2. Roy Schestowitz
> 3. Peter Kai JensOn
> 4. Roy Culley (various nyms)
> 5. Mark Kent
> 6. [H]omer
> 7. Kelsey Bjarnason
> 8. TheLetterK
> 9. Gregory Shearman
> 10. [email]roys.testicals@gmail.com[/email]
>
>
> Note #1: All stats are generated completely inside my brain.
> Note #2: Dumbness is measured as (propensity to spew bull**** *
> denials + lies - moments of clarity)/pi
> Note #3: This list should be taken as fact, and any denial as such
> will almost certainly warrant inclusion on the list.
>[/color]

Is this list even remotely useful? If you're going to
claim stupidity, you might want to indicate somewhere what
the stupidies actually are.

It's one thing to say "<Person> is stupid". It's another
to say "<Person>'s idea that <Notion> is a braindead notion
is stupid"; still another to simply state that "<Notion>
is braindead".

The third is arguably the most preferable.

--
#191, [email]ewill3@earthlink.net[/email]
Linux. An OS which actually, unlike certain other offerings, works.

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

____/ cc on Saturday 20 October 2007 22:44 : \____
[color=blue]
> Toplist of Dumbest Posters
>
>
> 1. Bob Hauck
> 2. Roy Schestowitz
> 3. Peter Kai JensOn
> 4. Roy Culley (various nyms)
> 5. Mark Kent
> 6. [H]omer
> 7. Kelsey Bjarnason
> 8. TheLetterK
> 9. Gregory Shearman
> 10. [email]roys.testicals@gmail.com[/email]
>
>
> Note #1: All stats are generated completely inside my brain.
> Note #2: Dumbness is measured as (propensity to spew bull**** *
> denials + lies - moments of clarity)/pi
> Note #3: This list should be taken as fact, and any denial as such
> will almost certainly warrant inclusion on the list.[/color]

What's the rubbish? I wasn't making fun of you or your posts, but with this
useless weekly thing, it's time to edit the filters. Sorry. :-(

On Oct 20, 7:01 pm, 7 <website_has_em...@www.enemygadgets.com> wrote:[color=blue]
> Note #2: Dumbness is measured as (propensity to spew bull**** *
> denials + lies - moments of clarity)/pi[/color]


You must be using the formula wrong. I verified it, and there's no way
I'm number 1, much less in the top ten. That's the beauty of open
source, verification. I know you're looking forward to inclusion on
next week's list. Keep up the retardation kid, and you'll make it to
the top (of my list).

On Oct 20, 11:11 pm, Roy Schestowitz <newsgro...@schestowitz.com>
wrote:[color=blue]
> ____/ cc on Saturday 20 October 2007 22:44 : \____
>
>
>
>
>[color=green]
> > Toplist of Dumbest Posters[/color]
>[color=green]
> > 1. Bob Hauck
> > 2. Roy Schestowitz
> > 3. Peter Kai JensOn
> > 4. Roy Culley (various nyms)
> > 5. Mark Kent
> > 6. [H]omer
> > 7. Kelsey Bjarnason
> > 8. TheLetterK
> > 9. Gregory Shearman
> > 10. roys.testic...@gmail.com[/color]
>[color=green]
> > Note #1: All stats are generated completely inside my brain.
> > Note #2: Dumbness is measured as (propensity to spew bull**** *
> > denials + lies - moments of clarity)/pi
> > Note #3: This list should be taken as fact, and any denial as such
> > will almost certainly warrant inclusion on the list.[/color]
>
> What's the rubbish? I wasn't making fun of you or your posts, but with this
> useless weekly thing, it's time to edit the filters. Sorry. :-([/color]


One post a week is too much for someone who posts thousands to ignore?
Oh, the irony. And making fun of me or my posts is not how you get on
the list. I gave the formula.

cc wrote:
[color=blue]
> On Oct 20, 7:01 pm, 7 <website_has_em...@www.enemygadgets.com> wrote:[color=green]
>> Note #2: Dumbness is measured as (propensity to spew bull**** *
>> denials + lies - moments of clarity)/pi[/color]
>
>
> You must be using the formula wrong.[/color]

What's the matter with you?
You must be an idiot!
The formula works perfectly for Micoshaft Asstroturfers fabricating stats!!!

On Oct 21, 10:59 am, 7 <website_has_em...@www.enemygadgets.com> wrote:[color=blue]
> cc wrote:[color=green]
> > On Oct 20, 7:01 pm, 7 <website_has_em...@www.enemygadgets.com> wrote:[color=darkred]
> >> Note #2: Dumbness is measured as (propensity to spew bull**** *
> >> denials + lies - moments of clarity)/pi[/color][/color]
>[color=green]
> > You must be using the formula wrong.[/color]
>
> What's the matter with you?
> You must be an idiot!
> The formula works perfectly for Micoshaft Asstroturfers fabricating stats!!![/color]

I'm not an idiot, correct use of the formula proves it. You on the
other hand...well you're scoring very high right now, but it's a long
week.

On Sun, 21 Oct 2007 15:25:54 +0000, cc wrote:
[color=blue]
> On Oct 21, 10:59 am, 7 <website_has_em...@www.enemygadgets.com> wrote:[color=green]
>> cc wrote:[color=darkred]
>> > On Oct 20, 7:01 pm, 7 <website_has_em...@www.enemygadgets.com> wrote:
>> >> Note #2: Dumbness is measured as (propensity to spew bull**** *
>> >> denials + lies - moments of clarity)/pi[/color]
>>[color=darkred]
>> > You must be using the formula wrong.[/color]
>>
>> What's the matter with you?
>> You must be an idiot!
>> The formula works perfectly for Micoshaft Asstroturfers fabricating stats!!![/color]
>
> I'm not an idiot, correct use of the formula proves it. You on the
> other hand...well you're scoring very high right now, but it's a long
> week.[/color]

7 is certainly a twit of the highest order, but you aren't helping
advocacy with your stupidity, either.

--
Kier

On Oct 21, 12:18 pm, Kier <val...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:[color=blue]
> On Sun, 21 Oct 2007 15:25:54 +0000, cc wrote:[color=green]
> > On Oct 21, 10:59 am, 7 <website_has_em...@www.enemygadgets.com> wrote:[color=darkred]
> >> cc wrote:
> >> > On Oct 20, 7:01 pm, 7 <website_has_em...@www.enemygadgets.com> wrote:
> >> >> Note #2: Dumbness is measured as (propensity to spew bull**** *
> >> >> denials + lies - moments of clarity)/pi[/color][/color]
>[color=green][color=darkred]
> >> > You must be using the formula wrong.[/color][/color]
>[color=green][color=darkred]
> >> What's the matter with you?
> >> You must be an idiot!
> >> The formula works perfectly for Micoshaft Asstroturfers fabricating stats!!![/color][/color]
>[color=green]
> > I'm not an idiot, correct use of the formula proves it. You on the
> > other hand...well you're scoring very high right now, but it's a long
> > week.[/color]
>
> 7 is certainly a twit of the highest order, but you aren't helping
> advocacy with your stupidity, either.
>[/color]

Well first, it's not stupidity. Second, I am helping. I'm encouraging
posters to write smart advocacy. How many times are people going to
hear arguments like this, "Linux is as usable and good as possible.
It's not perfect though, it could use improvements" (Gregory Shearman)
before they are turned off from Linux completely? That's right, 3
times.

On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 10:31:39 +0000, cc wrote:
[color=blue]
> On Oct 21, 12:18 pm, Kier <val...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:[color=green]
>> On Sun, 21 Oct 2007 15:25:54 +0000, cc wrote:[color=darkred]
>> > On Oct 21, 10:59 am, 7 <website_has_em...@www.enemygadgets.com> wrote:
>> >> cc wrote:
>> >> > On Oct 20, 7:01 pm, 7 <website_has_em...@www.enemygadgets.com> wrote:
>> >> >> Note #2: Dumbness is measured as (propensity to spew bull**** *
>> >> >> denials + lies - moments of clarity)/pi[/color]
>>[color=darkred]
>> >> > You must be using the formula wrong.[/color]
>>[color=darkred]
>> >> What's the matter with you?
>> >> You must be an idiot!
>> >> The formula works perfectly for Micoshaft Asstroturfers fabricating stats!!![/color]
>>[color=darkred]
>> > I'm not an idiot, correct use of the formula proves it. You on the
>> > other hand...well you're scoring very high right now, but it's a long
>> > week.[/color]
>>
>> 7 is certainly a twit of the highest order, but you aren't helping
>> advocacy with your stupidity, either.
>>[/color]
>
> Well first, it's not stupidity. Second, I am helping. I'm encouraging
> posters to write smart advocacy. How many times are people going to
> hear arguments like this, "Linux is as usable and good as possible.
> It's not perfect though, it could use improvements" (Gregory Shearman)
> before they are turned off from Linux completely? That's right, 3
> times.[/color]

But what you're doing here isn't encouraging anything positive, and surely
you must know it. It just convinces people that you're an idiot. What you
should do is post your own advocacy of whatever distros you like or use,
and stick up for you assertions.

--
Kier

On Oct 20, 7:04 pm, The Ghost In The Machine
<ew...@sirius.tg00suus7038.net> wrote:[color=blue]
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, cc
> <scatnu...@hotmail.com>
> wrote
> on Sat, 20 Oct 2007 21:44:39 -0000
> <1192916679.894954.146...@t8g2000prg.googlegroups.com>:
>
>
>
>
>[color=green]
> > Toplist of Dumbest Posters[/color]
>[color=green]
> > 1. Bob Hauck
> > 2. Roy Schestowitz
> > 3. Peter Kai JensOn
> > 4. Roy Culley (various nyms)
> > 5. Mark Kent
> > 6. [H]omer
> > 7. Kelsey Bjarnason
> > 8. TheLetterK
> > 9. Gregory Shearman
> > 10. roys.testic...@gmail.com[/color]
>[color=green]
> > Note #1: All stats are generated completely inside my brain.
> > Note #2: Dumbness is measured as (propensity to spew bull**** *
> > denials + lies - moments of clarity)/pi
> > Note #3: This list should be taken as fact, and any denial as such
> > will almost certainly warrant inclusion on the list.[/color]
>
> Is this list even remotely useful? If you're going to
> claim stupidity, you might want to indicate somewhere what
> the stupidies actually are.[/color]

It's incredibly useful if you're smart enough to use it.
[color=blue]
> It's one thing to say "<Person> is stupid". It's another
> to say "<Person>'s idea that <Notion> is a braindead notion
> is stupid"; still another to simply state that "<Notion>
> is braindead".
>
> The third is arguably the most preferable.
>[/color]

How about, "Not knowing how to use a useful list is braindead."

On Oct 22, 7:11 am, Kier <val...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:[color=blue]
> On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 10:31:39 +0000, cc wrote:[color=green]
> > On Oct 21, 12:18 pm, Kier <val...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:[color=darkred]
> >> On Sun, 21 Oct 2007 15:25:54 +0000, cc wrote:
> >> > On Oct 21, 10:59 am, 7 <website_has_em...@www.enemygadgets.com> wrote:
> >> >> cc wrote:
> >> >> > On Oct 20, 7:01 pm, 7 <website_has_em...@www.enemygadgets.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> Note #2: Dumbness is measured as (propensity to spew bull**** *
> >> >> >> denials + lies - moments of clarity)/pi[/color][/color]
>[color=green][color=darkred]
> >> >> > You must be using the formula wrong.[/color][/color]
>[color=green][color=darkred]
> >> >> What's the matter with you?
> >> >> You must be an idiot!
> >> >> The formula works perfectly for Micoshaft Asstroturfers fabricating stats!!![/color][/color]
>[color=green][color=darkred]
> >> > I'm not an idiot, correct use of the formula proves it. You on the
> >> > other hand...well you're scoring very high right now, but it's a long
> >> > week.[/color][/color]
>[color=green][color=darkred]
> >> 7 is certainly a twit of the highest order, but you aren't helping
> >> advocacy with your stupidity, either.[/color][/color]
>[color=green]
> > Well first, it's not stupidity. Second, I am helping. I'm encouraging
> > posters to write smart advocacy. How many times are people going to
> > hear arguments like this, "Linux is as usable and good as possible.
> > It's not perfect though, it could use improvements" (Gregory Shearman)
> > before they are turned off from Linux completely? That's right, 3
> > times.[/color]
>
> But what you're doing here isn't encouraging anything positive, and surely
> you must know it. It just convinces people that you're an idiot. What you
> should do is post your own advocacy of whatever distros you like or use,
> and stick up for you assertions.
>[/color]

I have posted advocacy of distros I like, and I've posted advocacy of
ideas I think should be implemented. How many times should I repeat
them? Besides I can only stick up for my assertions for so long when
the counter arguments don't gel with reality. You don't have to worry
about me and my advocacy, I can look after myself just fine.

On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 21:33:26 +0000, cc wrote:
[color=blue]
> On Oct 22, 7:11 am, Kier <val...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:[color=green]
>> On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 10:31:39 +0000, cc wrote:[color=darkred]
>> > On Oct 21, 12:18 pm, Kier <val...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
>> >> On Sun, 21 Oct 2007 15:25:54 +0000, cc wrote:
>> >> > On Oct 21, 10:59 am, 7 <website_has_em...@www.enemygadgets.com> wrote:
>> >> >> cc wrote:
>> >> >> > On Oct 20, 7:01 pm, 7 <website_has_em...@www.enemygadgets.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >> Note #2: Dumbness is measured as (propensity to spew bull**** *
>> >> >> >> denials + lies - moments of clarity)/pi[/color]
>>[color=darkred]
>> >> >> > You must be using the formula wrong.[/color]
>>[color=darkred]
>> >> >> What's the matter with you?
>> >> >> You must be an idiot!
>> >> >> The formula works perfectly for Micoshaft Asstroturfers fabricating stats!!![/color]
>>[color=darkred]
>> >> > I'm not an idiot, correct use of the formula proves it. You on the
>> >> > other hand...well you're scoring very high right now, but it's a long
>> >> > week.[/color]
>>[color=darkred]
>> >> 7 is certainly a twit of the highest order, but you aren't helping
>> >> advocacy with your stupidity, either.[/color]
>>[color=darkred]
>> > Well first, it's not stupidity. Second, I am helping. I'm encouraging
>> > posters to write smart advocacy. How many times are people going to
>> > hear arguments like this, "Linux is as usable and good as possible.
>> > It's not perfect though, it could use improvements" (Gregory Shearman)
>> > before they are turned off from Linux completely? That's right, 3
>> > times.[/color]
>>
>> But what you're doing here isn't encouraging anything positive, and surely
>> you must know it. It just convinces people that you're an idiot. What you
>> should do is post your own advocacy of whatever distros you like or use,
>> and stick up for you assertions.
>>[/color]
>
> I have posted advocacy of distros I like, and I've posted advocacy of
> ideas I think should be implemented. How many times should I repeat
> them? Besides I can only stick up for my assertions for so long when
> the counter arguments don't gel with reality. You don't have to worry
> about me and my advocacy, I can look after myself just fine.[/color]

Well, if you prefer to act like a troll, go right ahead. But don't expect
to get treated like an advocate.

--
Kier

On Oct 22, 6:13 pm, Kier <val...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:[color=blue]
> On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 21:33:26 +0000, cc wrote:[color=green]
> > On Oct 22, 7:11 am, Kier <val...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:[color=darkred]
> >> On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 10:31:39 +0000, cc wrote:
> >> > On Oct 21, 12:18 pm, Kier <val...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
> >> >> On Sun, 21 Oct 2007 15:25:54 +0000, cc wrote:
> >> >> > On Oct 21, 10:59 am, 7 <website_has_em...@www.enemygadgets.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> cc wrote:
> >> >> >> > On Oct 20, 7:01 pm, 7 <website_has_em...@www.enemygadgets.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> >> Note #2: Dumbness is measured as (propensity to spew bull**** *
> >> >> >> >> denials + lies - moments of clarity)/pi[/color][/color]
>[color=green][color=darkred]
> >> >> >> > You must be using the formula wrong.[/color][/color]
>[color=green][color=darkred]
> >> >> >> What's the matter with you?
> >> >> >> You must be an idiot!
> >> >> >> The formula works perfectly for Micoshaft Asstroturfers fabricating stats!!![/color][/color]
>[color=green][color=darkred]
> >> >> > I'm not an idiot, correct use of the formula proves it. You on the
> >> >> > other hand...well you're scoring very high right now, but it's a long
> >> >> > week.[/color][/color]
>[color=green][color=darkred]
> >> >> 7 is certainly a twit of the highest order, but you aren't helping
> >> >> advocacy with your stupidity, either.[/color][/color]
>[color=green][color=darkred]
> >> > Well first, it's not stupidity. Second, I am helping. I'm encouraging
> >> > posters to write smart advocacy. How many times are people going to
> >> > hear arguments like this, "Linux is as usable and good as possible.
> >> > It's not perfect though, it could use improvements" (Gregory Shearman)
> >> > before they are turned off from Linux completely? That's right, 3
> >> > times.[/color][/color]
>[color=green][color=darkred]
> >> But what you're doing here isn't encouraging anything positive, and surely
> >> you must know it. It just convinces people that you're an idiot. What you
> >> should do is post your own advocacy of whatever distros you like or use,
> >> and stick up for you assertions.[/color][/color]
>[color=green]
> > I have posted advocacy of distros I like, and I've posted advocacy of
> > ideas I think should be implemented. How many times should I repeat
> > them? Besides I can only stick up for my assertions for so long when
> > the counter arguments don't gel with reality. You don't have to worry
> > about me and my advocacy, I can look after myself just fine.[/color]
>
> Well, if you prefer to act like a troll, go right ahead. But don't expect
> to get treated like an advocate.
>[/color]

I prefer to act like I want to act. Also, and don't take this the
wrong way, I see how you're treated around here, and how exactly does
that differ?

In comp.os.linux.advocacy, cc
<scatnubbs@hotmail.com>
wrote
on Mon, 22 Oct 2007 21:30:23 -0000
<1193088623.346967.136110@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com>:[color=blue]
> On Oct 20, 7:04 pm, The Ghost In The Machine
> <ew...@sirius.tg00suus7038.net> wrote:[color=green]
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, cc
>> <scatnu...@hotmail.com>
>> wrote
>> on Sat, 20 Oct 2007 21:44:39 -0000
>> <1192916679.894954.146...@t8g2000prg.googlegroups.com>:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>[color=darkred]
>> > Toplist of Dumbest Posters[/color]
>>[color=darkred]
>> > 1. Bob Hauck
>> > 2. Roy Schestowitz
>> > 3. Peter Kai JensOn
>> > 4. Roy Culley (various nyms)
>> > 5. Mark Kent
>> > 6. [H]omer
>> > 7. Kelsey Bjarnason
>> > 8. TheLetterK
>> > 9. Gregory Shearman
>> > 10. roys.testic...@gmail.com[/color]
>>[color=darkred]
>> > Note #1: All stats are generated completely inside my brain.
>> > Note #2: Dumbness is measured as (propensity to spew bull**** *
>> > denials + lies - moments of clarity)/pi
>> > Note #3: This list should be taken as fact, and any denial as such
>> > will almost certainly warrant inclusion on the list.[/color]
>>
>> Is this list even remotely useful? If you're going to
>> claim stupidity, you might want to indicate somewhere what
>> the stupidies actually are.[/color]
>
> It's incredibly useful if you're smart enough to use it.[/color]

Of course.
[color=blue]
>[color=green]
>> It's one thing to say "<Person> is stupid". It's another
>> to say "<Person>'s idea that <Notion> is a braindead notion
>> is stupid"; still another to simply state that "<Notion>
>> is braindead".
>>
>> The third is arguably the most preferable.
>>[/color]
>
> How about, "Not knowing how to use a useful list is braindead."
>[/color]

You are aware, of course, that #10 is highly variable, depending
on the whims of the individual/person/idiot therein.

--
#191, [email]ewill3@earthlink.net[/email]
If your CPU can't stand the heat, get another fan.

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

On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 22:34:45 +0000, cc wrote:
[color=blue]
> On Oct 22, 6:13 pm, Kier <val...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:[color=green]
>> On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 21:33:26 +0000, cc wrote:[/color][/color]
[color=blue][color=green]
>> Well, if you prefer to act like a troll, go right ahead. But don't expect
>> to get treated like an advocate.
>>[/color]
>
> I prefer to act like I want to act. Also, and don't take this the
> wrong way, I see how you're treated around here, and how exactly does
> that differ?[/color]

A few noodle-brains who prefer to assume things about me don't represent
everyone in this group, no matter what they may believe. My point is, if
you want to encourage what you call 'smart' advocacy, you are going about
it in a totally non-productive way. Your foolish 'stats' will merely annoy
even those who would otherwise be inclined to support you efforts to
improve advocacy here.

So, if all you're intending to do is add to the noise, why bother to stay
at all? There are enough idiots here already. Another voice of reason and
good sense would be welcome, another trolling idiot is not.

--
Kier

On Oct 23, 3:38 am, Kier <val...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:[color=blue]
> On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 22:34:45 +0000, cc wrote:[color=green]
> > On Oct 22, 6:13 pm, Kier <val...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:[color=darkred]
> >> On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 21:33:26 +0000, cc wrote:
> >> Well, if you prefer to act like a troll, go right ahead. But don't expect
> >> to get treated like an advocate.[/color][/color]
>[color=green]
> > I prefer to act like I want to act. Also, and don't take this the
> > wrong way, I see how you're treated around here, and how exactly does
> > that differ?[/color]
>
> A few noodle-brains who prefer to assume things about me don't represent
> everyone in this group, no matter what they may believe. My point is, if
> you want to encourage what you call 'smart' advocacy, you are going about
> it in a totally non-productive way. Your foolish 'stats' will merely annoy
> even those who would otherwise be inclined to support you efforts to
> improve advocacy here.[/color]


Like who?
[color=blue]
> So, if all you're intending to do is add to the noise, why bother to stay
> at all? There are enough idiots here already. Another voice of reason and
> good sense would be welcome, another trolling idiot is not.
>[/color]

That's not what I'm intending to do at all. I hate the "why do you
even post here" questions. I post here because I want to post here,
because I like posting here, and your reasons don't necessarily have
to coincide with mine.

On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 10:11:41 +0000, cc wrote:
[color=blue]
> On Oct 23, 3:38 am, Kier <val...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:[color=green]
>> On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 22:34:45 +0000, cc wrote:[color=darkred]
>> > On Oct 22, 6:13 pm, Kier <val...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
>> >> On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 21:33:26 +0000, cc wrote:
>> >> Well, if you prefer to act like a troll, go right ahead. But don't expect
>> >> to get treated like an advocate.[/color]
>>[color=darkred]
>> > I prefer to act like I want to act. Also, and don't take this the
>> > wrong way, I see how you're treated around here, and how exactly does
>> > that differ?[/color]
>>
>> A few noodle-brains who prefer to assume things about me don't represent
>> everyone in this group, no matter what they may believe. My point is, if
>> you want to encourage what you call 'smart' advocacy, you are going about
>> it in a totally non-productive way. Your foolish 'stats' will merely annoy
>> even those who would otherwise be inclined to support you efforts to
>> improve advocacy here.[/color]
>
>
> Like who?[/color]

Quite a lot of us.
[color=blue]
>[color=green]
>> So, if all you're intending to do is add to the noise, why bother to stay
>> at all? There are enough idiots here already. Another voice of reason and
>> good sense would be welcome, another trolling idiot is not.
>>[/color]
>
> That's not what I'm intending to do at all. I hate the "why do you
> even post here" questions. I post here because I want to post here,
> because I like posting here, and your reasons don't necessarily have
> to coincide with mine.[/color]

You're not intending just to add to the noise? Okay, I can accept that
isn't actually your intention, but effectively that's all you're doing
with these foolish mock-stats. If you really do want to improve and
encourage advocacy here, that is *not* the way to go about it. I should
have thought that was obvious.

Despite its name, COLA is not necessarily the best place to advocate
Linux. Nevertheless, it can be done, and is quite often done, with varying
degrees of success. If you're not here to advocate, what are you here for?

--
Kier