Mono and RAND - Linux

This is a discussion on Mono and RAND - Linux ; Homer wrote: >>>>>>> Does Microsoft's utter moral depravity mean /nothing/ to >>>>>>> you? >>>>>> >>>>>> Hmmm... No. Not really. (snip) >Actually Willy misread me. I don't think you have /no/ ethics. You seem >to be a measured and reasonable person ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 86

Thread: Mono and RAND

  1. Re: Mono and RAND

    Homer wrote:

    >>>>>>> Does Microsoft's utter moral depravity mean /nothing/ to
    >>>>>>> you?
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Hmmm... No. Not really.


    (snip)

    >Actually Willy misread me. I don't think you have /no/ ethics. You seem
    >to be a measured and reasonable person but I do think you are apathetic,
    >which is not atypical I'm sad to say. I, OTOH, am somewhat unreasonable,
    >and often passionate to the point of melodrama.
    >
    >But I'm still right.


    It certainly should be a consideration, for all thinking and caring
    persons.

    Should one be so extreme that one refuses to work with Micro$oft
    products, even if it limits one's job opportunities? IMO, no.

    OTOH, with many decisions, Micro$oft's lack of ethics may, and
    sometimes should, be a significant factor.


  2. Re: Mono and RAND


    "William Poaster" wrote in message
    newsan.2008.05.29.16.51.21.678536@leafnode.amd64.eu...
    > On Thu, 29 May 2008 17:36:31 +0100, Homer wrote:
    >
    >> Verily I say unto thee, that Tom Shelton spake thusly:

    >
    >>>> William Poaster writes:
    >>>>> On Thu, 29 May 2008 01:27:53 +0100, Homer wrote:
    >>>>>> Verily I say unto thee, that Tom Shelton spake thusly:

    >>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Does Microsoft's utter moral depravity mean /nothing/ to you?
    >>>>>>> Hmmm... No. Not really.
    >>>>>> I rest my case.
    >>>>> So this "Tom Shelton" admits he has no scruples & no ethics. Not the
    >>>>> sort of person I'd have working in my company, unless I was M$ of
    >>>>> course.
    >>> That was not my point, though you can take it that way if you so desire.

    >>
    >> Actually Willy misread me. I don't think you have /no/ ethics. You seem
    >> to
    >> be a measured and reasonable person but I do think you are apathetic,
    >> which is not atypical I'm sad to say. I, OTOH, am somewhat unreasonable,
    >> and often passionate to the point of melodrama.

    >
    > Well perhaps I did read you wrong, & it's just his apathy.


    Poor dumb Willy. Too stupid to even have an opinion of his own. If
    [H]ypocrite says something than dumb Willy agrees. If [H]ypocrite then says
    something else then dumb Willy has to change his mind too.

    It must suck to be a spineless retard like Willy. Too stupid to have an
    original thought or an opinion of his own.



    >> But I'm still right.

    >
    > Yup.


    Me too Willy... me too!!! The spineless moron once again agrees with
    everything and anything the other retards post. In life there are leaders
    and followers. Dumb Willy follows the followers.



    ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

  3. Re: Mono and RAND

    On May 30, 4:10*am, Homer wrote:
    > Verily I say unto thee, that The Ghost In The Machine spake thusly:
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > > In comp.os.linux.advocacy, cc wrote on Thu,
    > > 29 May 2008 14:40:46 -0700 (PDT)
    > > :
    > >> On May 29, 1:44 pm, chrisv wrote:
    > >>> Should one be so extreme that one refuses to work with Micro$oft
    > >>> products, even if it limits one's job opportunities? *IMO, no.

    >
    > >>> OTOH, with many decisions, Micro$oft's lack of ethics may, and
    > >>> sometimes should, be a significant factor.

    >
    > >> So Microsoft's ethics should only come into play if it doesn't
    > >> affect your bottom line? That's hypocrisy. It's like the people who
    > >> use selectively use parts of the Bible while ignoring other parts.

    > [...]
    > > Since we don't have access to Windows source code and therefore can't
    > > use all of the Windows "Bible", does that mean no one outside of
    > > Microsoft has the right to complain about Microsoft hypocrisy at all?

    >
    > Good catch.
    >
    > It's ironic that Ballmer should mouth-off about "undisclosed balance
    > sheet liabilities" when Microsoft have failed to disclose so many of
    > their own, especially when it comes to issues of privacy and security.
    > Now /that's/ hypocrisy.
    >
    > Holding customers to ransom with secrets and clandestine deals, is not
    > quite the same thing as a moral obligation to cooperate with the vendor,
    > in much the same way as having a gun to one's head is not exactly a
    > moral obligation to capitulate with the attacker's demands.
    >
    > As a vendor of commercial; closed-sourced products, it is Microsoft that
    > has an obligation to their /customers/, not the other way round.
    >
    > And those unlucky enough to find themselves working somewhere that is a
    > Microsoft closed-shop, are merely victims of circumstances (the specific
    > circumstance being Microsoft's monopoly, that ensures the ubiquity of
    > Microsoft's products spreads everywhere, like a disease), /not/
    > necessarily willing participants.
    >


    They are willing participants. If you really feel that Microsoft is
    evil, then there are alternatives. Completely different fields where
    you don't have to work with Microsoft at all. The fact is that you and
    Novell both sold out your principals to work with Microsoft. That's
    ok, you have at least one mouth to feed (and possibly you're
    exagerrating your hatred of Microsoft for the crowd in here a little
    bit). But because of that neither you nor any one at Novell are in a
    position to criticize each other for what you have done. If you want
    others to stop receiving benefits (real or perceived) from Microsoft
    then you can't be reaping those same rewards. That's the definition of
    hypocrisy.

  4. Re: Mono and RAND

    > cc wrote:
    >>
    >> chrisv wrote:
    >>>
    >>> Should one be so extreme that one refuses to work with Micro$oft
    >>> products, even if it limits one's job opportunities? *IMO, no. *

    >>
    >> So Microsoft's ethics should only come into play if it doesn't affect
    >> your bottom line? That's hypocrisy.


    Nope, and only a stupid piece of **** would claim that it is. There's
    a lot of issues in the world and on people's minds. Not every issue
    in life is worthy of an extreme response. Depending on who you are
    and how you feel about an issue, a reasonable response may be casting
    a vote, protesting, writing a "letter to the editor" (or a blog),
    contributing to an organization that supports your ideals... Any
    number of responses.

    Only a really stupid piece of **** would call people hypocrites
    because they refused a job that was not "pure and perfect in every
    possible moral and ethical way". Only a really stupid piece of ****
    would call people hypocrites if were concerned about global warming
    but drove a car. Only a really stupid piece of **** would call people
    hypocrites if they were animal-rights advocates but not vegan.


  5. Re: Mono and RAND

    chrisv wrote:

    >> stupid piece of **** wrote:
    >>>
    >>> So Microsoft's ethics should only come into play if it doesn't affect
    >>> your bottom line? That's hypocrisy.

    >
    >Nope, and only a stupid piece of **** would claim that it is. There's
    >a lot of issues in the world and on people's minds. Not every issue
    >in life is worthy of an extreme response. Depending on who you are
    >and how you feel about an issue, a reasonable response may be casting
    >a vote, protesting, writing a "letter to the editor" (or a blog),
    >contributing to an organization that supports your ideals... Any
    >number of responses.
    >
    >Only a really stupid piece of **** would call people hypocrites
    >because they refused a job that was not "pure and perfect in every
    >possible moral and ethical way".


    That should say "because they DO NOT refuse a job..."

    >Only a really stupid piece of ****
    >would call people hypocrites if were concerned about global warming
    >but drove a car. Only a really stupid piece of **** would call people
    >hypocrites if they were animal-rights advocates but not vegan.


    I thought of another good one. Only a really stupid piece of ****
    would call people hypocrites if they are against nuclear power, yet
    use electricity so generated.

    The analogies are endless. It's simply not always practical to take
    an extreme/boycott position on everything that one thinks is "not
    right".


  6. Re: Mono and RAND

    > cc the stupid piece of **** wrote:
    >>
    >> So Microsoft's ethics should only come into play if it doesn't affect
    >> your bottom line?


    Oh, by the way, fsckwit. I wrote nothing of the kind. I wrote of
    limiting one's job opportunities. That's the fundamental means by
    which we support ourselves and our families. That's MORE than just
    one's "bottom line." I can, and do, contribute to various OSS
    projects, which affects my "bottom line", but I'd sure not refuse a
    job because I was required to use non-open software.

    Typical word twisting from a trolling piece of ****.


  7. Re: Mono and RAND

    On May 30, 1:50*pm, chrisv wrote:
    > chrisv wrote:
    > >> stupid piece of **** *wrote:

    >
    > >>> So Microsoft's ethics should only come into play if it doesn't affect
    > >>> your bottom line? That's hypocrisy.

    >
    > >Nope, and only a stupid piece of **** would claim that it is. *There's
    > >a lot of issues in the world and on people's minds. *Not every issue
    > >in life is worthy of an extreme response. *Depending on who you are
    > >and how you feel about an issue, a reasonable response may be casting
    > >a vote, protesting, writing a "letter to the editor" (or a blog),
    > >contributing to an organization that supports your ideals... *Any
    > >number of responses.

    >
    > >Only a really stupid piece of **** would call people hypocrites
    > >because they refused a job that was not "pure and perfect in every
    > >possible moral and ethical way". *

    >
    > That should say "because they DO NOT refuse a job..."
    >
    > >Only a really stupid piece of ****
    > >would call people hypocrites if were concerned about global warming
    > >but drove a car. *Only a really stupid piece of **** would call people
    > >hypocrites if they were animal-rights advocates but not vegan.

    >
    > I thought of another good one. *Only a really stupid piece of ****
    > would call people hypocrites if they are against nuclear power, yet
    > use electricity so generated.
    >
    > The analogies are endless. *It's simply not always practical to take
    > an extreme/boycott position on everything that one thinks is "not
    > right".


    The analogies don't apply to Microsoft. If there is no other
    alternative but driving, then so be it. If there is public
    transportation then you're a hypocrite. If there is no alternative to
    nuclear power, so be it. If there are alternatives in your area then
    you're a hypocrite. Also animal rights!=vegan at all. So you can make
    your false analogies all you want, but there are alternatives to
    Microsoft, and there are jobs in fields that have no relationship to
    Microsoft.

  8. Re: Mono and RAND

    On May 30, 1:58*pm, chrisv wrote:
    > > cc the stupid piece of **** wrote:

    >
    > >> So Microsoft's ethics should only come into play if it doesn't affect
    > >> your bottom line?

    >
    > Oh, by the way, fsckwit. *I wrote nothing of the kind. *I wrote of
    > limiting one's job opportunities. *That's the fundamental means by
    > which we support ourselves and our families. *That's MORE than just
    > one's "bottom line." *I can, and do, contribute to various OSS
    > projects, which affects my "bottom line", but I'd sure not refuse a
    > job because I was required to use non-open software.
    >
    > Typical word twisting from a trolling piece of ****.


    How is that twisting your words if you just ****ing said "I'd sure not
    refuse a job because I was required to use non-open software"? You
    just said exactly what I said. I'm not sure if this makes you a
    hypocrite because you never actually write anything of value in this
    group. It's hard to be a hypocrite when all you write is "plonk". But
    if you opposed Novell's deal with Microsoft then you would be a
    hypocrite. What makes them able to refuse jobs that are non-open
    source and not you?

  9. Re: Mono and RAND

    High Plains Thumper writes:

    > Homer wrote:
    >
    >> Trying to convince people, and especially distro maintainers,
    >> that they should stay away from Mono, is therefore
    >> extraordinarily difficult, and usually goes something like
    >> this:
    >>
    >> [P]oint | [C]ounterpoint
    >>
    >> P: Don't use Mono
    >> C: Why?
    >> P: Because it is patented
    >> C: So is a lot of other software
    >> P: Yes, but this is patented by Microsoft
    >> C: So?
    >> P: Microsoft is a convicted monopolist
    >> C: You're just biased against Microsoft
    >> P: I believe I am justified given Microsoft's history
    >> C: What history?

    >
    > No, too sterile. Anti-Linux argument will go like,
    >
    > C: You LIEnux loons, Microsoft cannot be a monopoly because of da dit
    > da dit da....


    *snip nonsensical garbage*

    Wow. Way to cement yourself in as COLA's thickest "poaster".

  10. Re: Mono and RAND

    Hadron wrote:
    > High Plains Thumper writes:


    >> C: You LIEnux loons, Microsoft cannot be a monopoly because of da dit
    >> da dit da....

    >
    > *snip nonsensical garbage*
    >
    > Wow. Way to cement yourself in as COLA's thickest "poaster".


    Notice HPT isn't too thick to try and make a living - or even look for a
    job - in a Linux-only environment.





  11. Re: Mono and RAND

    Verily I say unto thee, that High Plains Thumper spake thusly:

    > No, too sterile. Anti-Linux argument will go like,
    >
    > C: You LIEnux loons, Microsoft cannot be a monopoly because of da dit
    > da dit da....


    I was referring more to the type of debate that one typically has with
    certain distro maintainers; Gnome and Novell devs; and Mono fanboys,
    rather than Microsoft shills.

    When it comes to Microsoft /shills/, no amount of argument will convince
    them, since they are not interested in facts, they have a "job" to do.

    This is why I mostly ignore them, because engaging them in any form of
    "discussion" is merely feeding their commercial propaganda. They are
    more like advertisers; spin-doctors and PR staff than advocates, or
    "evangelists" as the Vole dubs them. Indeed, it's highly likely that
    this is exactly what they really are - paid propagandists. After all,
    what else could motivate a group of people to sabotage a Linux newsgroup
    relentlessly for years on end?

    And it's not like there's no precedent for such a thing either,
    Microsoft Munchkins were caught red-handed sabotaging the OS/2 group
    years ago.

    --
    K.
    http://slated.org

    ..----
    | 'When it comes to knowledge, "ownership" just doesn't make sense'
    | ~ Cory Doctorow, The Guardian. http://tinyurl.com/22bgx8
    `----

    Fedora release 8 (Werewolf) on sky, running kernel 2.6.23.8-63.fc8
    18:37:37 up 162 days, 15:13, 5 users, load average: 0.12, 0.06, 0.01

  12. Re: Mono and RAND

    Homer wrote:
    > High Plains Thumper spake:
    >
    >> No, too sterile. Anti-Linux argument will go like,
    >>
    >> C: You LIEnux loons, Microsoft cannot be a monopoly because
    >> of da dit da dit da....

    >
    > I was referring more to the type of debate that one typically
    > has with certain distro maintainers; Gnome and Novell devs;
    > and Mono fanboys, rather than Microsoft shills.
    >
    > When it comes to Microsoft /shills/, no amount of argument
    > will convince them, since they are not interested in facts,
    > they have a "job" to do.
    >
    > This is why I mostly ignore them, because engaging them in any
    > form of "discussion" is merely feeding their commercial
    > propaganda. They are more like advertisers; spin-doctors and
    > PR staff than advocates, or "evangelists" as the Vole dubs
    > them. Indeed, it's highly likely that this is exactly what
    > they really are - paid propagandists. After all, what else
    > could motivate a group of people to sabotage a Linux newsgroup
    > relentlessly for years on end?
    >
    > And it's not like there's no precedent for such a thing
    > either, Microsoft Munchkins were caught red-handed sabotaging
    > the OS/2 group years ago.


    Yes, I see that going on. What makes a difference is that now it
    is easier to refute their arguments with the truth. No longer do
    they appear as smoother talkers and convincers as they do as
    complete idiots.

    Thus, it is worthwhile to reply with factual information, to
    refute their tales and spins. Otherwise, they continue on with
    their diatribes.

    There is a fine line, worst is to behave as them and to flame for
    only the sake of flaming. All this does is provoke a flame war.
    This in essence is feeding.

    Finally, there is a point where it is worthwhile to back off,
    enough is enough. Then, that is the place to stop replying.

    --
    HPT
    Quando omni flunkus moritati
    (If all else fails, play dead)
    - "Red" Green

  13. Re: Mono and RAND

    High Plains Thumper writes:

    > Homer wrote:
    >> High Plains Thumper spake:
    >>
    >>> No, too sterile. Anti-Linux argument will go like,
    >>>
    >>> C: You LIEnux loons, Microsoft cannot be a monopoly because
    >>> of da dit da dit da....

    >>
    >> I was referring more to the type of debate that one typically
    >> has with certain distro maintainers; Gnome and Novell devs;
    >> and Mono fanboys, rather than Microsoft shills.
    >>
    >> When it comes to Microsoft /shills/, no amount of argument
    >> will convince them, since they are not interested in facts,
    >> they have a "job" to do.
    >>
    >> This is why I mostly ignore them, because engaging them in any
    >> form of "discussion" is merely feeding their commercial
    >> propaganda. They are more like advertisers; spin-doctors and
    >> PR staff than advocates, or "evangelists" as the Vole dubs
    >> them. Indeed, it's highly likely that this is exactly what
    >> they really are - paid propagandists. After all, what else
    >> could motivate a group of people to sabotage a Linux newsgroup
    >> relentlessly for years on end?
    >>
    >> And it's not like there's no precedent for such a thing
    >> either, Microsoft Munchkins were caught red-handed sabotaging
    >> the OS/2 group years ago.

    >
    > Yes, I see that going on. What makes a difference is that now it is
    > easier to refute their arguments with the truth. No longer do they
    > appear as smoother talkers and convincers as they do as complete
    > idiots.


    Only the group idiot High Plains Hypocrite could boast about how much
    better the group is with everyone killfiled and then spend the rest of
    the time talking about .... yes! The people he has killfiled. Duh!

  14. Re: Mono and RAND

    On Thu, 29 May 2008 16:26:30 -0400, Ezekiel wrote:

    > "William Poaster" wrote in message
    > newsan.2008.05.29.16.51.21.678536@leafnode.amd64.eu...
    >> On Thu, 29 May 2008 17:36:31 +0100, Homer wrote:
    >>
    >>> Verily I say unto thee, that Tom Shelton spake thusly:

    >>
    >>>>> William Poaster writes:
    >>>>>> On Thu, 29 May 2008 01:27:53 +0100, Homer wrote:
    >>>>>>> Verily I say unto thee, that Tom Shelton spake thusly:
    >>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> Does Microsoft's utter moral depravity mean /nothing/ to you?
    >>>>>>>> Hmmm... No. Not really.
    >>>>>>> I rest my case.
    >>>>>> So this "Tom Shelton" admits he has no scruples & no ethics. Not the
    >>>>>> sort of person I'd have working in my company, unless I was M$ of
    >>>>>> course.
    >>>> That was not my point, though you can take it that way if you so desire.
    >>>
    >>> Actually Willy misread me. I don't think you have /no/ ethics. You seem
    >>> to
    >>> be a measured and reasonable person but I do think you are apathetic,
    >>> which is not atypical I'm sad to say. I, OTOH, am somewhat unreasonable,
    >>> and often passionate to the point of melodrama.

    >>
    >> Well perhaps I did read you wrong, & it's just his apathy.

    >
    > Poor dumb Willy. Too stupid to even have an opinion of his own. If
    > [H]ypocrite says something than dumb Willy agrees. If [H]ypocrite then says
    > something else then dumb Willy has to change his mind too.
    >
    > It must suck to be a spineless retard like Willy. Too stupid to have an
    > original thought or an opinion of his own.
    >
    >
    >
    >>> But I'm still right.

    >>
    >> Yup.

    >
    > Me too Willy... me too!!! The spineless moron once again agrees with
    > everything and anything the other retards post. In life there are leaders
    > and followers. Dumb Willy follows the followers.


    William Poaster is something of a Lemmings Lemming!!



    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

  15. Re: Mono and RAND

    On Sat, 31 May 2008 21:57:17 +0200, Hadron wrote:


    > Only the group idiot High Plains Hypocrite could boast about how much
    > better the group is with everyone killfiled and then spend the rest of
    > the time talking about .... yes! The people he has killfiled. Duh!


    Each time I read a message by High Plaines Humper I have to read it again 3
    times because I cannot believe that anyone could be that ignorant?


    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

  16. Re: Mono and RAND

    Hadron wrote:
    > High Plains Thumper writes:
    >> Homer wrote:
    >>
    >>> When it comes to Microsoft /shills/, no amount of argument
    >>> will convince them, since they are not interested in
    >>> facts, they have a "job" to do.
    >>>
    >>> This is why I mostly ignore them, because engaging them in
    >>> any form of "discussion" is merely feeding their
    >>> commercial propaganda. They are more like advertisers;
    >>> spin-doctors and PR staff than advocates, or "evangelists"
    >>> as the Vole dubs them. Indeed, it's highly likely that
    >>> this is exactly what they really are - paid propagandists.
    >>> After all, what else could motivate a group of people to
    >>> sabotage a Linux newsgroup relentlessly for years on end?
    >>>
    >>> And it's not like there's no precedent for such a thing
    >>> either, Microsoft Munchkins were caught red-handed
    >>> sabotaging the OS/2 group years ago.

    >>
    >> Yes, I see that going on. What makes a difference is that
    >> now it is easier to refute their arguments with the truth.
    >> No longer do they appear as smoother talkers and convincers
    >> as they do as complete idiots.

    >
    > Only the group idiot High Plains Hypocrite could boast about
    > how much better the group is with everyone killfiled and then
    > spend the rest of the time talking about .... yes! The people
    > he has killfiled. Duh!


    Homer, just reeled another one in, BINGO!

    http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/2007/...ark-troll.html

    http://tinyurl.com/6zawmg

    Subject: Re: Microsoft's Secret Sauce for 'Success'
    Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 20:32:35 +0900
    Message-ID: pan.2007.07.19.11.32.30.969000@gREMTHISmail.com


    >> No it isn't. Linux is freely available for download. The
    >> problem is that for too long Linux was crap and simply not
    >> ready for the prime time desktop. It is now. But it's missed
    >> the boat. And people like you whining all the time about MS
    >> isn't going to change that. Grow a set of balls and advocate
    >> LINUX and stop whinging like schoolgirl about the Market
    >> Leader.


    Hadron uses a very common trolling technique. Rather than
    participate in the discussion, attempts to deflect the issues by
    flinging insulting retorts, such as homophobic name calling and
    referring to a poster's expressions as "whines". In his
    insulting, extolls a competing operating system by calling it a
    market leader. This confirms he is here to troll.

    He misrepresents the truth, showing that he truly is not an
    advocate, referring to Linux as crap. Yet 10 years ago, Linux was
    a complete and suitable desktop product. As you show in the
    following explanations regarding Microsoft concerns expressed
    through the Halloween papers.
    --
    HPT

  17. Re: Mono and RAND

    Moshe, Goldfarb. wrote:
    > Hadron wrote:
    >
    >> Only the group idiot High Plains Hypocrite could boast about
    >> how much better the group is with everyone killfiled and
    >> then spend the rest of the time talking about .... yes! The
    >> people he has killfiled. Duh!

    >
    > Each time I read a message by High Plaines Humper I have to
    > read it again 3 times because I cannot believe that anyone
    > could be that ignorant?


    Hmmm .... as ignorant as?

    http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/2008/...arb-troll.html

    http://tinyurl.com/6m6a8c

    Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy, alt.os.linux.ubuntu
    Subject: Re: [News] Red Hat Developer's Update on PulseAudio,
    Fedora Live CDs Interview
    Message-ID: Xns9A7D9779E7902thisnthatadelphianet@66.250.146.12 8
    Date: 11 Apr 2008 18:53:55 GMT


    > Dan, you're probably a nice guy, but we get a ton of "works
    > for me" crap in COLA and most times it's just people telling
    > lies.


    Well sorry to dissapoint you, but I'm not in COLA. I'm reading
    these posts in the Ubuntu group. The only reason they are going
    to COLA is because whomever started the thread had it crossposted
    there...and to Vista groups, which I removed because this has
    nothing to do with Vista.

    I'm NOT a Linux pusher, I still use Windows most of the time
    since I'd just installed Linux a few weeks ago, maybe a month+
    ago, and still checking out apps and learning Linux. There are
    things I like and things I don't like.

    Believe what you want to believe. It's painfully obvious that you
    are completely anti-Linux, just like some are completely anti-MS,
    and have such strong preconceived beliefs that it doesn't really
    matter what anyone says about any particular Linux item,
    everyone's a liar, and nothing works out-of-the-box.
    http://tinyurl.com/5hwppw

    From: Moshe Goldfarb [brick.n.straw@gmail.com]
    Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
    Subject: Re: I never liked the ReiserFS for one simple reason...
    Date: Sat, 3 May 2008 09:59:50 -0400
    Message-ID: 1r8x6y6djvmx.9t8hmras1mto.dlg@40tude.net

    High Plains Thumper (the name) sounds like some kind of a deranged
    effeminate cowboy that stepped right off Brokeback Mountain.
    --
    HPT
    Quando omni flunkus moritati
    (If all else fails, play dead)
    - "Red" Green

  18. Re: Mono and RAND

    On Sat, 31 May 2008 19:08:32 -0700 (PDT), High Plains Thumper wrote:


    Can you be any more ignorant HPT?
    Where are you when Roy spams all kinds of off topic crap about Zune?
    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

  19. Re: Mono and RAND

    On Sat, 31 May 2008 19:16:22 -0700 (PDT), High Plains Thumper wrote:

    > Moshe, Goldfarb. wrote:
    >> Hadron wrote:
    >>
    >>> Only the group idiot High Plains Hypocrite could boast about
    >>> how much better the group is with everyone killfiled and
    >>> then spend the rest of the time talking about .... yes! The
    >>> people he has killfiled. Duh!

    >>
    >> Each time I read a message by High Plaines Humper I have to
    >> read it again 3 times because I cannot believe that anyone
    >> could be that ignorant?

    >
    > Hmmm .... as ignorant as?


    As you High Plains Humper.

    Can you be any more ignorant HPT?
    Where are you when Roy spams all kinds of off topic crap about Zune?



    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

  20. Re: Mono and RAND

    Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    > High Plains Thumper wrote:
    >> Moshe, Goldfarb. wrote:
    >>> Hadron wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Only the group idiot High Plains Hypocrite could boast
    >>>> about how much better the group is with everyone
    >>>> killfiled and then spend the rest of the time talking
    >>>> about .... yes! The people he has killfiled. Duh!
    >>>
    >>> Each time I read a message by High Plaines Humper I have
    >>> to read it again 3 times because I cannot believe that
    >>> anyone could be that ignorant?

    >>
    >> Hmmm .... as ignorant as?
    >>
    >> http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/2008/...arb-troll.html
    >>
    >> http://tinyurl.com/6m6a8c
    >>
    >> Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy, alt.os.linux.ubuntu
    >> Subject: Re: [News] Red Hat Developer's Update on
    >> PulseAudio, Fedora Live CDs Interview
    >> Message-ID:
    >> Xns9A7D9779E7902thisnthatadelphianet@66.250.146.12 8
    >> Date: 11 Apr 2008 18:53:55 GMT
    >>
    >>

    >>> Dan, you're probably a nice guy, but we get a ton of
    >>> "works for me" crap in COLA and most times it's just
    >>> people telling lies.

    >>
    >> Well sorry to dissapoint you, but I'm not in COLA. I'm
    >> reading these posts in the Ubuntu group. The only reason
    >> they are going to COLA is because whomever started the
    >> thread had it crossposted there...and to Vista groups, which
    >> I removed because this has nothing to do with Vista.
    >>
    >> I'm NOT a Linux pusher, I still use Windows most of the time
    >> since I'd just installed Linux a few weeks ago, maybe a
    >> month+ ago, and still checking out apps and learning Linux.
    >> There are things I like and things I don't like.
    >>
    >> Believe what you want to believe. It's painfully obvious
    >> that you are completely anti-Linux, just like some are
    >> completely anti-MS, and have such strong preconceived
    >> beliefs that it doesn't really matter what anyone says about
    >> any particular Linux item, everyone's a liar, and nothing
    >> works out-of-the-box.
    >>
    >> http://tinyurl.com/5hwppw
    >>
    >> From: Moshe Goldfarb [brick.n.straw@gmail.com]
    >> Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
    >> Subject: Re: I never liked the ReiserFS for one simple
    >> reason...
    >> Date: Sat, 3 May 2008 09:59:50 -0400
    >> Message-ID: 1r8x6y6djvmx.9t8hmras1mto.dlg@40tude.net
    >>
    >>
    High Plains Thumper (the name) sounds like some kind
    >> of a deranged effeminate cowboy that stepped right off
    >> Brokeback Mountain.

    >
    > As you High Plains Humper.


    http://www.hyphenologist.co.uk/killf..._troll_faq.htm

    Subject: 3.4 The nasty Troll
    If anyone does anything which will interfere with the troll's
    ability to cause mayhem, they can become very nasty, posting from
    obviously incorrect variations of the name etc. insults, call
    them netcops, netnannies, homosexuals.

    > Can you be any more ignorant HPT?
    > Where are you when Roy spams all kinds of off topic crap about
    > Zune?


    http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/

    7.6 Trespasser Disinformation Tactics

    10. Refuse to admit your errors. Never ever admit your errors no
    matter how blatant they are. If you find no way out and have to
    admit that you are wrong, phrase it so that you can accuse your
    opponent of being wrong.
    --
    HPT

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast