Some of my biggest peeves about linux - Linux

This is a discussion on Some of my biggest peeves about linux - Linux ; Erik Funkenbusch wrote: > On Tue, 02 Oct 2007 19:02:22 +0200, Peter Köhlmann wrote: > >> Erik Funkenbusch wrote: >> >>> On Tue, 02 Oct 2007 10:34:28 +0100, Doug Mentohl wrote: >>> >>>> Erik Funkenbusch wrote: >>>> >>>> > So ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 42

Thread: Some of my biggest peeves about linux

  1. Re: FUD, fresh from the oven ...

    Erik Funkenbusch wrote:

    > On Tue, 02 Oct 2007 19:02:22 +0200, Peter Köhlmann wrote:
    >
    >> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
    >>
    >>> On Tue, 02 Oct 2007 10:34:28 +0100, Doug Mentohl wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>> > So I just got the latest FudPack from Microsoft and I'd just like to
    >>>> seed COLA with some, with a little help from all you troll feeders who
    >>>> ignore positive Linux advocacy but have loads of time for fuddie and
    >>>> chums ..
    >>>>
    >>>> This brings me into gripe #4
    >>>>
    >>>> Why is it there is no Drag and Drop for viruses like there has been in
    >>>> Windows since v 3.11. Why can't I execute a virus by opening an e-mail
    >>>> or clicking on a Web Link, come on you COLA nuts, do my homework for me
    >>>> .....
    >>>
    >>> Daeron. You have gone too far. It is absolutely intolerable to
    >>> manufacture quotes. This is bull****, you lying prick.

    >>
    >> Interesting that you *never* objected to it when it was done by windows
    >> using scum, Erik
    >>
    >> And they do it *often*
    >>
    >> Most of the wintrolls in here have edited quotes. There are very few
    >> exceptions

    >
    > So, you condone "turnabout is fair play"?


    No. I call you a twit for *never* objecting to the wintroll scum

    > I don't read every message in here,


    Yes. Your usual excuse.

    > nor do I read threads once they degenerate into troll fests.


    I don't care why you never object to your ilks bad behaviour. The point is:
    You never object to it

    > I don't see you criticizing 7 or Kent or any
    > of a number of so called "advcoates" either.


    I have criticized "7" several times
    I have called Mark Kent just yesterday and today a "dishonest twit" (which
    he is, btw)

    > Yet you criticize me for not doing so. Why?
    >

    Because you find fault exclusivly with linux advocates. Vastly worse
    behaviour from wintrolls falls by the wayside *every* time with you.

    > I've said it a number of times. I don't feed trolls. If you and others
    > ignored them, they would get bored and go away because they're only
    > looking for responses.


    Tell that to flatfish or linux-sux
    Erik, *that* argument will never fly.

    > We're not talking about a known troller here. We're not talking about
    > flatfish or linuxsux.


    We are. Since when was it up to you to dictate what is discussed here, Erik?
    You are scum just as well as flatfish or linux-sux. Remember the "Rex
    episode"? Or your near constant lying? In reality you are not better than
    flatfish or linux-sux. You are even worse, since you at least are not so
    atrociously stupid as linux-sux or DFS

    > We're talking about someone who purports to be a
    > real Linux advocate who is now reduced to fabricating entire messages and
    > attributing them to others.


    He has not fabricated an "entire message". It was one line
    It was wrong. But yet the point stands: You don't object to much more
    questional behaviour of wintroll scum. Because you yourself are scum
    --
    Who the **** is General Failure, and why is he reading my harddisk?


  2. Re: FUD, fresh from the oven ...

    On Tue, 02 Oct 2007 20:09:51 +0200, Peter Khlmann wrote:

    >> So, you condone "turnabout is fair play"?

    >
    > No. I call you a twit for *never* objecting to the wintroll scum


    That's not true. I have, on a number of occasions, criticized them.

    I'm sure a number of people in here can testify to that fact. It's,
    unfortunately, a bit difficult to google for these situations.

    Don't you remember the "Richard L. Smith" nymshifter that I was
    instrumental in tracking down and exposing?

  3. Re: Some of my biggest peeves about linux

    Erik Funkenbusch wrote:

    > Hmm.. I'm not sure I understand what you're getting at. *Linux and Unix
    > tend to dump all executables into one of a few folders. *Now, this is
    > similar to the MacOS "Applications" folder, but the difference is that the
    > Mac apps have their subfolders for all their non-configurable (and some
    > configurable) files.
    >
    > I actually like the way OSX does things, and I think it could be easily
    > adaptable to Linux.


    Isn't there one or more Linux distros that drastically revamp the file and
    directory structure? I'm thinking Symphony OS but I may be wrong.

  4. Re: FUD, fresh from the oven ...

    Erik Funkenbusch wrote:

    > On Tue, 02 Oct 2007 20:09:51 +0200, Peter Köhlmann wrote:
    >
    >>> So, you condone "turnabout is fair play"?

    >>
    >> No. I call you a twit for *never* objecting to the wintroll scum

    >
    > That's not true. I have, on a number of occasions, criticized them.


    So fine, you did very rarely object
    And object practically every time when a linux advocate does something wrong
    (or just perceived, by you, wrong)

    It does not change the fact that you are extremely blind on one eye
    --
    There are two kinds of people in this world: the kind that divides
    everybody into two kinds of people, and everybody else


  5. Re: Some of my biggest peeves about linux

    In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Peter Kai Jensen

    wrote
    on 02 Oct 2007 17:50:19 GMT
    <470284db$0$2093$edfadb0f@dtext02.news.tele.dk>:
    >
    > Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
    >
    >>> That's not really all that different from how Linux and other *nix
    >>> systems organize files.

    >>
    >> Hmm.. I'm not sure I understand what you're getting at. Linux and
    >> Unix tend to dump all executables into one of a few folders.

    >
    > Executables, yes. And the config files go in the config file folder,
    > the icons in the icon folder, and the menu shortcuts in the menu
    > shortcut folder.
    >
    >> Now, this is similar to the MacOS "Applications" folder, but the
    >> difference is that the Mac apps have their subfolders for all their
    >> non-configurable (and some configurable) files.

    >
    > Right, and in Linux all these files are placed where their function
    > dictates. The difference is only philosophical, in that the end user
    > should never have to find these folders in the first place (in both
    > Linux and OSX).
    >
    >> I actually like the way OSX does things, and I think it could be
    >> easily adaptable to Linux.

    >
    > What isn't easily adaptable to Linux? But what benefit does it bring?
    >
    >>> Well, JAR files *are* essentially executables (especially when using
    >>> the miscellaneous binary format interface), in much the same way a
    >>> script is.

    >>
    >> This is a very interesting idea. You could gzip (or even shar or tar)
    >> all the files into a single archive with a special header (or maybe
    >> even just a file flag inside the archive) that differentiates it as a
    >> "package".

    >
    > Or just an extension, if one uses the binfmt_misc interface.
    >
    >> Then, the shells could be modified to recognize this and execute the
    >> apps within.

    >
    > Binfmt_misc and a simple shell script.
    >
    >> The only problem being the need to decompress the archives to run the
    >> application, which could negatively impact performance.

    >
    > For most applications, it would be a short startup delay. With an
    > intelligent packing and coding, one could even make sure that the most
    > vital parts are unpacked first, so the application can start to load.
    >
    >> The files could be loaded into memory though instead of saved onto
    >> disk.

    >
    > Well, /dev/shm/ comes to mind. I think it would take about 15 minutes
    > to implement a simple version of what you describe (and it's essentially
    > what a JAR file does). I just don't think it's a particularly good
    > idea, as I don't see which benefit it provides.
    >


    Presumably, the primary benefit Erik is looking for is
    the simple one of allowing a display shell (nautilus or
    konqueror) access to resources within the executable,
    to allow display of an icon within the display shell
    that uniquely identifies the executable. In Linux, the
    functionality is apparently currently implemented via
    *.desktop files -- a throwback to Amiga days, if anyone
    remembers that far back (except that Amiga used *.info)
    -- and therefore does not measure up to Erik's liking,
    for some reason.

    Unlike Amiga's *.info, however, *.desktop can contain
    a reference to another image, which can be svg (nice and
    scalable) or png. Useful for customization. The *.desktop
    can also execute an arbitrary program or script; the names
    need not correspond.

    It is possible Erik is looking for more comprehensive
    benefits, but really there are some issues here.

    [1] Internationalization of some Linux applications can
    currently be done by adding a file or directory into a
    known location. The new system would presumably require
    patching of the executable; while possible, it is more
    difficult.

    It is also possible in current Linux apps that
    one might have to add additional lines to certain
    configuration files. I have no idea where these are,
    though /etc/gconf/schemas contains some interesting stuff
    which looks like it might be relevant to this problem.

    For its part KDE apparently puts things in
    /usr/kde/3.5/share/locale//entry.desktop,
    /usr/kde/3.5/share/locale/all_languages, and
    /usr/kde/3.5/share/locale/en_US/l10n//entry.desktop
    for such things as language descriptions, e.g., "French"
    in French is "Francais" (actually, the c is the cedilla)
    and country names. I don't know where per-application
    messages are being shoved.

    If one wants to customize .desktop messages:

    Name[locale]=text

    is all that's required. The locale for me would be 'en_US'
    or 'en' (sans quotes), and one can put in additional locales
    thusly:

    Name=Generic Hello World.
    Name[en_US]=Hello World from the US of A.
    Name[en]=Hello World from somewhere that speaks English.
    Name[de_DE]=Weldgruss von Deutschland.
    Name[de]=Weldgruss von etwas Deutsches.

    Or something like that. (My German is *extremely* rusty.)

    [2] It is far from clear whether such a patched executable
    will be able to support more than one locale -- an issue
    when one is moving computers around.

    --
    #191, ewill3@earthlink.net
    Windows. Because it's not a question of if.
    It's a question of when.

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


  6. Re: Some of my biggest peeves about linux

    Erik Funkenbusch wrote:

    > On Mon, 1 Oct 2007 17:39:52 -0700, Jim Richardson wrote:
    >
    > > dunno, hasn't bothered me, but I can see how some folks would be
    > > annoyed by this nit.

    >
    > It's funny that you guys bitch and moan about the "arduous" task of
    > finding device drivers when you install Windows, but don't even blink
    > about having to search (or create) artwork for icons.


    Hmmm, maybe because...

    1. You don't have to search/create icons.

    2. Icons are ****ing eye candy, but without drivers you're SOL.

    Idiot.


  7. Re: Some of my biggest peeves about linux

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

    > So I was talking with someone about Linux today, and I started into a list
    > of all the things that really bug me about it, whithout realizing just how
    > much they bothered me. So, I decided to list them here.
    >
    > 1) Lack of embedded resources/icons in executables.
    >
    > This is one of my biggest pet peeves. Windows has always had this, very
    > basic feature... as has MacOS. Why is it that even in 2007, Linux
    > applications cannot have embedded resources? Why do I have to go looking
    > for icons for apps that I want in my kicker or whatever quick launcher you
    > want to use? It's not like it's even impossible to do this with ELF, there
    > have been several proposals for this.


    I think it is simply a different system, and that Linux programs only
    put the resources in a program that are needed to run the program.

    It's the modularity factor.

    > This brings me into gripe #2
    >
    > 2) No Drag and Drop for desktop docks/panels/kickers/etc.. Again, it's
    > 2007. Why can't i just drag a program from Konqueror or Nautilus onto the
    > quicklauncher and have an entry inserted to access it, icon and all? Why
    > am I forced to use some arcane configuration applet or edit a text file for
    > this basic funcationality that Windows and OSX have had for more than 10
    > years? And while we're at it, why not drag and drop in the program menus
    > that most DE's have as well?


    That one leaves me cold, even though I think you are mistaken. I use
    fluxbox, and never use icons or drag-and-drop.

    > 3) Why is it that, even after all these years, Desktop Environment dialogs
    > and panels all still look like they're the cousin of the old AmigaOS 3.x?
    > Let's compare:
    >
    > http://www.kdecn.org/dot/img/vol5_355_kmplot_dialog.png


    Come on, Erik, this is pathetic. Try KDE's Keramik theme instead.

    > http://www.gnome.org/~davyd/gnome-2-...int-dialog.png


    The only point you are making here, Erik, is that you don't use Linux
    enough to know even the basics of Gnome or KDE themes and the various
    theme engines that provide some pretty nice drawing effects.

    You're still stuck in the 90's with your Linux experience.

    > http://www.installationexcellence.co...s/old_save.png


    There are plenty of KDE and GTK themes that are prettier than that.

    Hint:

    http://www.gnome-look.org
    http://www.kde-look.org

    Hell, even XFce:

    http://www.xfce-look.org/content/pre...Kougyoku-Black

    > http://content.answers.com/main/cont...eet_dialog.jpg


    Same stuff.

    Where have you been, in a cave?

    >
    > ----------------------
    >
    > You may think of these things as nit picks, but to me they're highly
    > annoying.



    --
    Tux rox!

  8. Re: Some of my biggest peeves about linux

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

    > On Mon, 1 Oct 2007 17:39:52 -0700, Jim Richardson wrote:
    >
    >> dunno, hasn't bothered me, but I can see how some folks would be annoyed
    >> by this nit.

    >
    > It's funny that you guys bitch and moan about the "arduous" task of finding
    > device drivers when you install Windows, but don't even blink about having
    > to search (or create) artwork for icons.


    /usr/share/pixmaps

    Yeesh!

    > http://www.gnome.org/start/2.20/note...omboy-sync.png


    What's wrong with that one? It's simply a nearly-flat theme?

    > http://www.gnome.org/start/2.20/note...references.png


    You should see my kdbg setup. Can't be bothered to get a screen shot
    just now, though.

    >> Whining about the look of the dialogs, without exploring the various
    >> themes available for same, is pretty lame.

    >
    > It's not the graphics or the shading or the colors. It's the layouts.
    > They're square and blocky with huge amounts of dead space. These are
    > things no amount of theming is going to change.


    You're weird, man.

    --
    Tux rox!

  9. Re: Some of my biggest peeves about linux

    On Tue, 02 Oct 2007 15:47:13 -0400, Tattoo Vampire wrote:

    > Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
    >
    >> Hmm.. I'm not sure I understand what you're getting at. *Linux and Unix
    >> tend to dump all executables into one of a few folders. *Now, this is
    >> similar to the MacOS "Applications" folder, but the difference is that the
    >> Mac apps have their subfolders for all their non-configurable (and some
    >> configurable) files.
    >>
    >> I actually like the way OSX does things, and I think it could be easily
    >> adaptable to Linux.

    >
    > Isn't there one or more Linux distros that drastically revamp the file and
    > directory structure? I'm thinking Symphony OS but I may be wrong.


    I don't know about Symphony, but GoboLinux maps to more of a MacOS like
    struture.

  10. Re: Some of my biggest peeves about linux

    Verily I say unto thee, that Handover Phist spake thusly:
    > Erik Funkenbusch :


    .... advocates:

    .. Making Linux executables as bloated as on Windows
    .. Cluttering up the Linux desktop with icons just like Windows
    .. Turning Linux dialogue boxes into cartoon strips, just like Windows

    >> You may think of these things as nit picks, but to me they're
    >> highly annoying.

    >
    > And highly changeable.


    Unlike Windows.

    --
    K.
    http://slated.org

    ..----
    | "OOXML is a superb standard"
    | - GNU/Linux traitor, Miguel de Icaza.
    `----

    Fedora release 7 (Moonshine) on sky, running kernel 2.6.22.1-41.fc7
    01:05:41 up 55 days, 0 min, 2 users, load average: 0.00, 0.06, 0.17

  11. Re: Some of my biggest peeves about linux

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    On Tue, 2 Oct 2007 11:24:34 -0500,
    Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
    > On Mon, 1 Oct 2007 17:39:52 -0700, Jim Richardson wrote:
    >
    >> dunno, hasn't bothered me, but I can see how some folks would be annoyed
    >> by this nit.

    >
    > It's funny that you guys bitch and moan about the "arduous" task of finding
    > device drivers when you install Windows, but don't even blink about having
    > to search (or create) artwork for icons.
    >
    >>> This brings me into gripe #2
    >>>
    >>> 2) No Drag and Drop for desktop docks/panels/kickers/etc.. Again, it's
    >>> 2007. Why can't i just drag a program from Konqueror or Nautilus onto the
    >>> quicklauncher and have an entry inserted to access it, icon and all? Why
    >>> am I forced to use some arcane configuration applet or edit a text file for
    >>> this basic funcationality that Windows and OSX have had for more than 10
    >>> years? And while we're at it, why not drag and drop in the program menus
    >>> that most DE's have as well?

    >>
    >> this works fine for me with Gnome, are you sure you have tried this? I
    >> dragged a binary from a nautilus window into the gnome panel, and it
    >> starts fine. What fails for you?

    >
    > Interesting, I've tried this with KDE and a number of others, but I don't
    > recall if I tried it with Gnome. If it works for Gnome, then mea culpa.
    > Still, KDE should really provide this functionality as well.
    >
    >> Um, Erik? Gnome2.8 may have been released in mid september, but it was
    >> mid september in 2004...

    >
    > Sorry, was doing a quick search. I missed that. Here's better example:
    >
    > http://www.gnome.org/start/2.20/note...omboy-sync.png
    > http://www.gnome.org/start/2.20/note...references.png
    >
    >> And no, they *dont't* look like old AmigaDos 3.x

    >
    > Actually, Gnome does share a lot of UI element similarties to AmigaOS.
    > Notice the font-size selector in that last image, very similar to Amiga's
    > rotational selector (although it's probably closer to the MacOS dropdown
    > list)
    >


    so you're complaining that linux is more like the OSX lok than the
    AmigaOS look? huh?

    >> Whining about the look of the dialogs, without exploring the various
    >> themes available for same, is pretty lame.

    >
    > It's not the graphics or the shading or the colors. It's the layouts.
    > They're square and blocky with huge amounts of dead space. These are
    > things no amount of theming is going to change.



    Wait, now you're complaining that the dialog isn't *cluttered*?


    that's a bit of a turn around.


    How is it any more "square and blocky" than OSX or XP/Vista?


    Hint, you can do rounded corners with themes, just saying. In fact, you
    can make it look like OSX, but I already said that, and somehow, you
    clipped that part out...

    I'm sure you had a good reason for that of course.

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQFHAuexd90bcYOAWPYRAkFxAJ4rCSNZN7SkIpbmhDpy0N MVmcgmLgCaArXF
    anyhoXSzjpWZdjgJCMXCJFo=
    =KAXd
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

    --
    Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
    Never appeal to a man's 'better nature.' He may not have one. Invoking his
    self-interest gives you more leverage. -- Lazarus Long

  12. Re: Some of my biggest peeves about linux

    After takin' a swig o' grog, [H]omer belched out this bit o' wisdom:

    > . Making Linux executables as bloated as on Windows
    > . Cluttering up the Linux desktop with icons just like Windows
    > . Turning Linux dialogue boxes into cartoon strips, just like Windows
    >
    >>> You may think of these things as nit picks, but to me they're
    >>> highly annoying.

    >>
    >> And highly changeable.

    >
    > Unlike Windows.


    Actually, just about whereever there's a DLL, Windows is changeable.

    But we get what you mean.

    --
    Tux rox!

  13. Re: Some of my biggest peeves about linux

    Erik Funkenbusch wrote:

    > I don't know about Symphony, but GoboLinux maps to more of a MacOS like
    > struture.


    That's the one I was thinking of, thanks.

  14. Re: Some of my biggest peeves about linux

    Erik Funkenbusch wrote:

    > >> 2) No Drag and Drop for desktop docks/panels/kickers/etc.. Again,
    > >> it's 2007. Why can't i just drag a program from Konqueror or
    > >> Nautilus onto the quicklauncher and have an entry inserted to
    > >> access it, icon and all? Why am I forced to use some arcane
    > >> configuration applet or edit a text file for this basic
    > >> funcationality that Windows and OSX have had for more than 10
    > >> years? And while we're at it, why not drag and drop in the
    > >> program menus that most DE's have as well?

    > >
    > > this works fine for me with Gnome, are you sure you have tried
    > > this? I dragged a binary from a nautilus window into the gnome
    > > panel, and it starts fine. What fails for you?

    >
    > Interesting, I've tried this with KDE and a number of others, but I
    > don't recall if I tried it with Gnome. If it works for Gnome, then
    > mea culpa. Still, KDE should really provide this functionality as
    > well.


    It works fine with KDE too you ignorant cunt.

    ROTFL! Nice self spank there slick. Nothing like telling the world "Hey
    look at me, I'm lying out my ass!".


  15. Re: FUD, fresh from the oven ...

    On 2 Oct, 17:51, Erik Funkenbusch wrote:

    > Daeron. You have gone too far. It is absolutely intolerable to
    > manufacture quotes. This is bull****, you lying prick.


    Do you think that no-one here is smart enough to see it as satire, or
    can't they tell the difference between it and one of your excretions.
    A favorite tactic of yours is to respond to an imaginary made up
    quote, I call it the FunkenShuffle ...



  16. Re: FUD, fresh from the oven ...

    On Wed, 03 Oct 2007 07:50:11 -0700, Doug Mentohl wrote:

    > On 2 Oct, 17:51, Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
    >
    >> Daeron. You have gone too far. It is absolutely intolerable to
    >> manufacture quotes. This is bull****, you lying prick.

    >
    > Do you think that no-one here is smart enough to see it as satire, or
    > can't they tell the difference between it and one of your excretions.
    > A favorite tactic of yours is to respond to an imaginary made up
    > quote, I call it the FunkenShuffle ...


    You have a long way to go to understand what satire is. That was not it.

    And I have *NEVER* responded to some imaginary made up quote. Prove so, or
    admit, once again, to lying through your teeth you lying prick.

  17. Re: FUD, fresh from the oven ...

    The Ghost In The Machine espoused:
    > In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Peter Khlmann
    >
    > wrote
    > on Tue, 02 Oct 2007 19:02:22 +0200
    >:
    >> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
    >>
    >>> On Tue, 02 Oct 2007 10:34:28 +0100, Doug Mentohl wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>> > So I just got the latest FudPack from Microsoft
    >>>> > and I'd just like to
    >>>> seed COLA with some, with a little help from all
    >>>> you troll feeders who ignore positive Linux advocacy
    >>>> but have loads of time for fuddie and chums ..
    >>>>
    >>>> This brings me into gripe #4
    >>>>
    >>>> Why is it there is no Drag and Drop for viruses like
    >>>> there has been in Windows since v 3.11. Why can't I
    >>>> execute a virus by opening an e-mail or clicking on a
    >>>> Web Link, come on you COLA nuts, do my homework for me
    >>>> .....
    >>>
    >>> Daeron. You have gone too far. It is absolutely
    >>> intolerable to manufacture quotes. This is bull****,
    >>> you lying prick.

    >>
    >> Interesting that you *never* objected to it when it was
    >> done by windows using scum, Erik
    >>
    >> And they do it *often*
    >>
    >> Most of the wintrolls in here have edited quotes.
    >> There are very few exceptions

    >
    >
    > There's quote editing, and quote editing. *I* edit
    > quotes to reformat the line widths (they get too wide
    > after awhile); apologies in advance if I totally munge
    > the meaning thereby.
    >
    > Of course, that's different from manufacturing quotes:
    >
    > * I eat dead people, with shallots
    >
    >:-)
    >


    Erik's posts are off-topic and anti-charter and therefore should not be
    here in the first place. Complaining about someone creating a satire of
    one of his off-topic and anti-charter postings is hardly reasonable from
    someone who's happy to break all the rules in order to suit himself.

    --
    | Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
    | Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
    | Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
    | My (new) blog: http://www.thereisnomagic.org |

  18. Re: FUD, fresh from the oven ...

    Doug Mentohl espoused:
    > On 2 Oct, 17:51, Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
    >
    >> Daeron. You have gone too far. It is absolutely intolerable to
    >> manufacture quotes. This is bull****, you lying prick.

    >
    > Do you think that no-one here is smart enough to see it as satire, or
    > can't they tell the difference between it and one of your excretions.
    > A favorite tactic of yours is to respond to an imaginary made up
    > quote, I call it the FunkenShuffle ...
    >


    Quite. I liked your posting - it summed up Erik's off-topic,
    anti-charter posts very well.

    --
    | Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
    | Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
    | Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
    | My (new) blog: http://www.thereisnomagic.org |

  19. Re: FUD, fresh from the oven ...

    Erik Funkenbusch wrote:

    >On Wed, 03 Oct 2007 07:50:11 -0700, Doug Mentohl wrote:
    >
    >> On 2 Oct, 17:51, Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
    >>
    >>> Daeron. You have gone too far. It is absolutely intolerable to
    >>> manufacture quotes. This is bull****, you lying prick.

    >>
    >> Do you think that no-one here is smart enough to see it as satire, or
    >> can't they tell the difference between it and one of your excretions.
    >> A favorite tactic of yours is to respond to an imaginary made up
    >> quote, I call it the FunkenShuffle ...

    >
    >You have a long way to go to understand what satire is. That was not it.
    >
    >And I have *NEVER* responded to some imaginary made up quote. Prove so, or
    >admit, once again, to lying through your teeth you lying prick.


    Have a run in your stockings, today, Fuddie?


  20. Re: FUD, fresh from the oven ...

    On 2007-10-10, Mark Kent wrote:
    > Quite. I liked your posting - it summed up Erik's off-topic,
    > anti-charter posts very well.


    Nonsense. The charter is:

    For discussion of the benefits of Linux compared to other operating
    systems

    That covers almost all of Erik's posts (but few of yours).

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