Richard Stallman (younger days)
MOMENTS ago we posted an important statement from the FSF, which was long coming. The FSF still advises against C# and Mono. Other new posts about Mono reveal that attack on messengers is the preferred tactic of Microsoft or Mono proponents. Some of them cannot defend what they advocate or do, not on a technical level anyway, let alone the legal. Just watch how Stallman gets attacked [1, 2] following a tactless remark that occupied less than 10 seconds in a 2-hour talk (or thereabouts). People who wish to eliminate Stallman from the discussion would simply accentuate, exaggerate, spin, take out of context, fail to interpret humour (it was a Cult of the Virgin Mary parody), etc. it's intended to incite against him and capitalise on lack on research. This is not to justify poor stage act from Stallman; au contraire, but to either quote-mine or to ignore a track record of advocacy for women's rights from Richard Stallman would be foolish at best, if not altogether dishonest.
The pettiness of Apple continues... Last month, Apple warned potential buyers of the Palm Pre that it might break that phone's ability to sync with iTunes. It didn't take long for Apple to follow through. In an upgrade to iTunes, which Apple claims was for "bug fix" but also to handle "verification" issues, it has blocked the Palm Pre from accessing iTunes.
One of the things that was touched upon was the recent release of the Palm Pre smartphone which relies on Apple's iTunes software for synchronising music with a computer. An interesting question asked was what would happen if Apple decided to block the Pre from using iTunes. Now, just over a week later, this is exactly what happened. Apple has indeed blocked the Pre from using iTunes with its latest update.
Unfortunately, this is just business as usual in the world of proprietary software. In the end, Palm will surely find a way around this, but in the meantime, the users are being held hostage. Adding insult to injury, many Palm Pre owners have likely been purchasing music from iTunes to put on their new smartphones, thus becoming Apple customers as well, so in the end this move hurts Apple's music sales too.
Many people fail to remember that the vast majority of IBM's and Apple's application layer is as proprietary as it gets. This includes even Lotus Symphony and Apple's Web browser, which exploited the work of KDE (KHTML).
It is with great regret that we find Matt Asay, the man who some regard as the reason for Microsoft's infiltration into the OSI, more or less inviting more of Microsoft into the OSI. This is atrociously naive and fortunately he is no longer in the OSI, but neither is Bruce Perens. At the same time, Asay is dismissing (almost mocking) those who are aware of Microsoft's endless malice, writing them off as extremists. Jason has already responded to this in length.
In the first article Mr. Asay asserts that the Open Source community is “stagnant”, “insular”, full of “group-think”, and the tent needs widening. He also suggests that the community rejects “anything that fails to discuss knighthood and/or sainthood for Richard Stallman”
His solution: include representatives from Microsoft and Oracle on the OSI board.
Well, I came for the Stallman/Open Source talk, but I stayed for the stupid. I just thought it a bit of interest that the man relases two articles in two days each with a bit of anti-GPL / anti-Free Software / anti-Stallman angle in them.
EVERYBODY is, or will become, an "extremist" by that logic. Those who attend a specific church or social group. Those who are members of a specific organization. Democrats. Republicans. Independents. Americans. Chinese. The dead, although they keep their opinions to themselves, if psychics are lying.
Matt Asay's "solution" is what Microsoft is already working as hard as possible to achieve, and it sponsors the most extremist group (in computers) that I am aware of: Technical Evangelists. James Plamondon's children.
Microsoft also has created or funded several front organizations, which are similar to James Plamondon's "stacked panel", because while they appear in public to be neutral they actually work on Microsoft's behalf and in Microsoft's interest behind the scenes. The ACT is an example. ACT was created to lobby congress during the DOJ trial in order to paint the DOJ as "punishing success" or "being against" capitalism. When Microsoft ran into trouble in Eruope the ACT suddenly found it necessary to open an office in Switzerland in order to lobby the EU in Microsoft's behalf. When other computer related US companies had problems in Europe the ACT didn't find it necessary to lobby the EU on their behalf. Only for Microsoft.
Another Microsoft front organization is the "Initiative for Software Choice", which always seems to favor proprietary lock-ins over Open Source applications, except for the lip-service.
[...]
According to Asay, they qualify as extremists because they always associate with Microsoft and adopt Microsoft's attitude and position on each and every topic that would affect Microsoft's bottom line. Actions by people or government that would be unfavorable to Microsoft's bottom line would be unfavorable to these proxy organizations -- their CEO's, their sales, their existence DEPENDS on their selling Microsoft's products. Failing to broaden their market reach they have become part of the most extremist organization ever to infect the computer world.
Using Asay's definition Microsoft and its proxies are extremists. In fact, they are by any definition. Just be careful you don't run afoul of another Microsoft front organization, the BSA.
“Only by imposing ignorance upon them will they tolerate or even defend such abuse.”The answer is simple: because those companies are taking away people's freedom and stomping on people's rights, so no wonder those people don't like it. What else can be expected? Only by imposing ignorance upon them will they tolerate or even defend such abuse. This includes Apple/Mac enthusiasts at times.
The context of Asay's remark ought to be understood. He is hoping to change how people perceive open source by weakening the definition and giving up on more essential rights in the process (what Stallman might call "ruinous compromises"). It is further distancing from libre software, so to paraphrase and slightly change something Stallman said about Linus Torvalds, if you care about Freedom in software, don't follow Asay. This is intended to be said politely, not abrasively. From Asay alone, Stallman bashing or at least critique goes a long way back (before his time in CNET). We found an impressive string of posts criticising the GPL after posting Stallman-hostile essays for several years. Eric Raymond was among the recent inspirers.
Examples of other attacks on the GPL include Black Duck's black box surveys (mentioned briefly in [1, 2]) and a variety of posts that are innocently taking "open source" just where Microsoft wants it to be. Maybe it is not innocent, but these sources will be given the benefit of the doubt.
Microsoft is not trying to hijack only "open source" by the way. We repeatedly warn that Microsoft is trying to control the virtual gateway to servers and in the process it hijacks the virtualisation market leader, apparently by initially colluding with EMC. Here is the latest addition:
VMware bulks up on former Microsoft exec
VMware is starting to look a lot like the good old days at Microsoft, at least in terms of its executive ranks. The Palo Alto, Calif. virtualization company -- led by former Microsoft exec Paul Maritz -- recently recruited former Google and Microsoft big shot Mark Lucovsky to an unnamed position.
--Alan Cox to Eric Raymond
Comments
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-17 17:20:21
...a track record of advocacy for women’s rights from Richard Stallman...
Hm. Would that "track record" possibly include being completely unaware that there were actually women who worked (with him) on GCC...?
Anyone can say stuff, Roy. It's what you do that matters. Folks say you have a "track record of advocacy against Mono", but that doesn't make you anything other than a deceitful weasel (as this article again demonstrates).
—Richard Stallman, women's rights "advocate"
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-17 17:27:32
I've pointed out the sexist content in the St. IGNUcious routine. I guess that constitutes "accentuating", in some pretty tortuous sense. However, I'm interested in knowing what I've "spun", "exaggerated" or "taken out of context". Be very specific, Roy. You know how I feel about hand-waving.
As far as an inability to "interpret humor", you seem to be laboring under the following sort of reasoning: "It's a parody of the Cult of the Virgin Mary, and since the Catholic Church says a lot of sexist stuff, if Stallman tells a sexist 'joke' in the course of ridiculing Catholicism, that somehow 'flips the bit' on the sexist part and magically turns what appeared to pretty much the entire audience to be an out of place, offensive and sexually-loaded snipe at women into a blow in favor of feminism!"
Have I got that right?
If so, you're demented.
nachokb
2009-07-17 18:14:44
There's nothing demented in taking that as it is: a mocking of sexists.
But, crying out sexism, capitalizing on established sensitivities, is twisting his words to fit your own agenda.
nachokb
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-17 18:28:43
Okay, in the Universe next door, their RIchard Stallman is identical to ours, save for one, tiny difference: it's Confucianism at which he wants to poke "gentle fun", rather than Catholicism.
Accordingly, he dresses up on stage in a sort of Fu Manchu outfit, puts in big buck teeth, and dons a coolie hat (made from a hard disk platter, you can't get those any more, you know!). Why, it's the beloved ConGNUcius, come to read to us from the Analects of EMACS and show us the proper way in which to conduct ourselves, in an accent lifted from a 1934 Charlie Chan movie.
Now:
Is that still "just poking gentle fun at religion"? Is it somehow not racist? Why or why not? Are we still having fun, anyone offended or upset? Extra credit: Do you have to be Asian to be offended? Extra-extra credit: Because this is clearly parodic, making fun of religion, does the use of the accent actually constitute a concrete statement against racism? Why or why not?
Show your work.
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-17 18:31:12
Have fun!
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-17 18:33:34
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-17 20:27:44
That's a fairly complete concession, I'd say, that I'm right about Stallman's remarks and you should just knock off that silly, "well, it was taken out of context, misinterpreted, dyed blue, spun dry and covered with fairy dust, but it's not sexist, I swear, I swear, I swear, I swear, and it's all just a witch hunt!" nonsense.
Come on, Roy. Say, "uncle", admit when you're wrong. New experiences are good, you might like it!
nachokb
2009-07-17 20:44:49
> But that doesn’t make it not sexist, as I’ve detailed above.
By that reasoning, Stallman's joke doesn't imply he does see anything out of place in the mocked myth... He criticizes and remarks one aspect in a sarcastic tone, and that's not making it NOT against that aspect? Great. You could invent you own logic here!
> Evidently, my reasoning exceeded your capacity. Let’s try it one more time, for the five-year-olds
Thanks for enlighening me.
> Okay, in the Universe next door, their RIchard Stallman is identical to ours, save for one, tiny difference: it’s Confucianism at which he wants to poke “gentle fun”, rather than Catholicism.
I may be lacking some context here (but I assume it's a pun to what RMS replied to your email, wrt priests in the audience).
First of all, if there's a valid critique of Confucianism, be my guest. That will be judged on the merits of the critique -- which is irrelevant to this argument. As a side note, I don't really see the relevancy of the pun at all (on another side note, **Confucianism is not a religion**, though it may have inherited such traits -- irrelevant in any case).
Point in fact, I believe you may be trying to capitalize on some people's belief that religion shouldn't be subject to critique. So, do you accept that religions (or beliefs, or philosophies) are legitimate targets of critique?
> (long pun) > Is that still “just poking gentle fun at religion”?
Let's assume it is a religion. If you have criticism about it, you are welcome (actually, I don't care, not my turf). I may agree or not, but I will not take offense just because you point out something you see as wrong.
OTOH, joking about pronouncing the "r" as an "l" is a childish joke and rather stupid for casting it in a pejorative way, and someone **could** be offended for that (you can criticize an action or opinion, not simply laugh at a person because he is or speaks differently).
If you refer at the lame attempt to concoct the principles of Free Software with Confucianism in a simplistic way... well, I disagree with it (and believe it is lame), but I would never ask you to refrain from saying that (all it can do is make he who says it look like an idiot). Please, go ahead.
> Is it somehow not racist? Why or why not?
The only "racist" thing about it is mocking someone pronunciation. It is too stupid to be offensive, I might think, but I'm not Asian so I wouldn't know.
> Are we still having fun, anyone offended or upset?
No one should. Some may, but that doesn't give them the right to shut others up...
> Extra credit: Do you have to be Asian to be offended?
For mocking their pronunciation, I think it would be none of my business to be offended -- plus, I insist, it only portraus he who would say that as a stupid.
If it threatened some basic right (criticizing a belief does not threaten a basic right), then by all means some non-Asian could take issue, but should be sufficiently informed to do so, and accept certain level of "risk" that his information could prove not to be trusted...
> Extra-extra credit: Because this is clearly parodic, making fun of religion,
Parodic yet still less funny than RMS's original joke :D (and it's not a religion).
> does the use of the accent actually constitute a concrete statement against racism? Why or why not?
One more time, for four years olds (and that's also parodic, see? we all know how to do it): you are not mocking people because of how they speak. Mocking the mocker would be against!.
So, te recapitulate: RMS mocked a sexist myth. Attributing to him one of the characteristics he was criticizing is deceitful.
> Reminder: if you take the position that ConGNUcius is not okay, but Saint IGNUcius is, you need to justify that.
Saint IGNUcius does not mock Catholics for being dwarf or ugly or bad pronunciation, but because they are (among other thing) sexist.
Nice red herring you've got in there...
nachokb
nachokb
2009-07-17 20:47:47
Is flooding blogs part of what they pay you to do? Some of us have things to do you know...
nachokb
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-17 21:24:58
I'm sorry, it's impossible to discuss racism with a racist (especially an ignorant one), and it's impossible to discuss sexism with a sexist, it seems.
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-17 21:28:26
No, not at all. I'm responding to the (generally bone-headed) comments people make here. As I've said, I'm only representing myself here.
In point of fact, I'm on a comp day, I traveled all last weekend and worked the entire weekend before (well, attended the conference), so it's my day off.
Some of us have things to do you know…
I'm sorry, are you somehow laboring under the impression that I'm holding a gun to your head and forcing you to read? That's a hallucination.
You simply need to stand up and step away from the computer. It's not that difficult.
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-17 21:33:18
I mean, I dumbed it all the way down to the point where a 12-year-old who's been raised by anything other than wolves would say, "Well, no, that's not funny at all. That's wrong. He shouldn't do that" and nachos-on-his-kb there couldn't even grasp that.
Astounding. "It's not a religion." Incredible. It's really a testimonial to this morass.
twitter
2009-07-18 01:51:09
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-18 05:04:55
makomk
2009-07-18 16:03:26
Extra credit answer: No, you don't have to be Asian to be offended, but there may be issues if you then start fighting their battles for them. Extra-extra credit: No, the accent doesn't constitute a concrete statement against racism - why would it? After all, you are presumably using it because you hold racist stereotypes. (This is a really awful analogy for the Cult of the Virgin of Emacs; in that case, there's a reasonable argument the sexism originated within the religion that was being parodied.) It is possible to use racist stereotypes in humour to mock racism, but it's very hard.
Also, a bonus tip: trying this analogy around feminists may perhaps be unwise, since the philosophical tools required to unpick it are fairly similar to the ones they use. YMMV as to how they use them, of course.
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-17 17:31:18
Kinda like when you say one thing to my face and the exact opposite behind my back, see, Roy?
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-17 17:33:27
Finalzone
2009-07-17 17:57:04
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-17 18:03:54
How so?
nachokb
2009-07-17 18:25:03
Shouting FUD at anyone who slightly disagrees with you doesn't help, either.
Regards,
nachokb
Roy Schestowitz
2009-07-17 18:28:00
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-17 18:53:15
My postings are indeed "controversial". This whole site is controversial. Stand there with a straight face and tell me this very article isn't controversial.
(Unless you're saying that part of your "no censorship" policy is that everyone has to say what you tell them.)
Some might cal them "inflammatory", but--just looking at the ratings, and unsupported accusations of "gaming" and "loopholes" aside, that's the only objective metric we've got around this quagmire--many would not. In particular, it's clear that the ex-co-editor of this site, at a time when it might possibly have actually had something to do with something remotely resembling "journalism", Shane Coyle, "values" my contributions. He agrees with me "more often than not". So I dispute that. In contrast, egregious and unsupported claims like the one you just made, right now, so don't stand there slack-jawed and goggle-eyed, are clearly inflammatory, and you do that all the time, Roy.
My messages are most certainly not irrelevant, they're responsive and on point, sometimes disturbingly so to the folks trying to make their cases by Blunt and Repeated Assertion, as you do here; again, I'd call the message from you to which I'm responding "irrelevant".
I'm not off-topic, although you and Jose frequently are, like right now. Willy always is.
Now, Mr.-or-Ms. nachokb asserted that the routine wasn't sexist. I believed that he-or-she did not understand my reasoning. I came up with a quite direct analogy to my original reason, put into terms which even a child of eleven or twelve could reasonably grasp. I even added helpful guidance to make sure that Mr.-or-Ms. nachokb would fully comprehend what I was looking for.
I'm waiting for a response to the simple, clear and specific questions I asked. Instead, I get "Troll! Troll!"
I don't fit the definition, Roy. You do. You run the site, and you're the troll here, and you get help from your cadre of little trollettes.
How sad is that?
nachokb doesn't seem to want to take his-or-her chances here. Maybe you want to step up to the plate, Roy...?
eet
2009-07-17 19:06:57
Yeah, Roy; linking the word 'internet troll' makes you look SOOO much more professional... (To say it in a language that you understand: no postee linkee no needee :))
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-17 19:08:39
FUD? Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt?
Gee, pal, do I scare you? Maybe you should ask your mommy if there's something less frightening for you to do.
Uncertainty? Doubt? Well, your position is completely untenable, and unjustifiable, as my little analogy (which I gather you're not choosing to tackle? Sorry, you fail to support your claims, better luck next time!) shows. So you should feel uncertain about it. You should doubt the conclusions to which you've so hastily and unthinkingly leapt.
This is a healthy thing for you, although I certainly understand it can be painful if you're unused to it. It's called "reasoning".
nachokb
2009-07-17 20:59:16
Sorry, couldn't help it. Promise this is the last.
> My postings are indeed “controversial”.
> Controversy is a state of prolonged public dispute or debate usually concerning a matter of opinion. (Wikipedia)
Saddens me to break it to you David, but no, your posts are not controversial, as they do not entail opinions, only misrepresentations.
Deceitful is more appropriate.
Cheers,
nachokb
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-17 21:47:16
Saddens me to break it to you David, but no, your posts are not controversial, as they do not entail opinions, only misrepresentations.
Oh? They certainly seem to fit the definition, hand-in-glove, as it were.
I don't think I've misrepresented anything.
I accurately reported Stallman's comments, as corrobororated by other attendees.
I accurately reported the audience reaction, as documented in the numerous blog postings about it.
I reproduced Stallman's emails verbatim, so there's no possibility of misrepresentation there.
So, what have I misrepresented?
(Maybe this is a good moment for you to run away.)
Deceitful is more appropriate.
Only if you can show that it's actually the case. I don't think you can. Saying it doesn't make it true.
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-17 18:10:55
Now, if he'd written me back in response to my email and said, "Gee, you know, I never really considered that. I'm deeply sorry if I made anyone feel that way about it, and I'll consider altering or removing that part of Saint IGNUcius in the future. I definitely don't think it's good to single out women, and my sense of humor got away with me, please convey my apologies to as many people who were upset by this as you can", he might have actually come out of this looking good. Bonus points for posting the letter on his web site.
Too bad the FSF doesn't make Eben Moglen read Stallman's mail before he gets to send it, hm?
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-17 20:23:17
That's pretty telling.
twitter
2009-07-18 02:23:53
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-18 05:08:54
Stallman said what he said, and he wrote what he wrote. He didn't see any need for an apology, which is certainly his privilege, but people evidently didn't feel very happy with that.
So, what are you muttering about, Willy?
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-18 05:13:31
Free Software Fundamentalism. Freedom The Way We Tell You.
"We swear allegiance to our leader, Richard Stallman..."
What's up with that?
twitter
2009-07-18 15:32:42
Of course, your prolific spam is only the beginning of your nastyness. While publishing the most vile bullshit against everyone here and Richard Stallman, you also threaten lawsuits against those who notice that you are lying. I've pointed out how you are wrong about both Roy and RMS, but you persist in your malice. Even I'm tired of dealing with you, Lefty. Piss off.
Roy Schestowitz
2009-07-18 15:45:44
David,
Frankly speaking, you have been rude to a lot of people. Don't you see why you receive so much backlash from people, whom I have nothing to do with? And then you blame them for 'attacking' you (ah! The hypocrisy) and threaten to sue.
Take some time to think about how you approach people.
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-18 16:42:29
Cry me a river, Willy.
Piss off.
Aw, make me, Bluto.
Roy Schestowitz
2009-07-18 16:49:35
You have provoked EVERY. SINGLE. PERSON. Who reads/supports this Web site.
You used as an excuse some flamewar from a mailing list to come to this Web site and provoke, provoke, provoke, hoping to use a response to to your endless provocation in order to harass this Web site.
That's the way it seems to me. Do you have no manners? Can you not speak like a gentleman? Maybe it's intentional.
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-18 16:54:05
No, I'll just sue you for repeating the same old irresponsible defamations at second-hand, after you'd promised not to, how's that sound? You 'n' me, Roy. Maybe the rest of the guys will take a much-needed lesson from the keelhauling you're heading toward. We'll see, I guess.
Frankly speaking, you have been rude to a lot of people. Don’t you see why you receive so much backlash from people, whom I have nothing to do with? And then you blame them for ‘attacking’ you (ah! The hypocrisy) and threaten to sue.
I get to be as rude as I like, it's freedom of speech. I'm no ruder than you are or Willy is, probably less so. I make twice as much sense as the two of you put together. So stop whining.
The posting of company contact information in a stupid and cowardly attempt to intimidate, as I patiently explained at the time, is an act that you promote, as editor of this journalistic site, by creating an ongoing climate of lies, of defamation, and of abuse of journalistic privilege (why not?) As the editor, I hold you wholly responsible.
You wanted to wear the hat, Roy. The responsibility comes with it. They're a set, see?
Roy Schestowitz
2009-07-18 16:58:23
That "posting" is not mine. It's a comment from someone who you called "chimp" dozens of times. You provoked and provoked as though you wanted to make it happen.
I was going to ask this earlier: do you want me to censor that comment? It's highly inappropriate for a comment.
Moses "Righty" Prussinger
2009-07-17 18:38:23
Watch: http://www.limofoundation.org/images/stories/pdf/090310_limo_ipr_policy_final%20%282%29.pdf
and here: http://www.slideshare.net/eCommConf/21-david-lefty-schlesinger
Sure, "Lefty" is the person to teach Richard Stallman manners and save the virgin mary. It is the "holy duty" for all Stallman supporters to abolish software patents, and expose their lobbyists and cronies.
Roy Schestowitz
2009-07-17 19:06:11
From David's presentation: "Intellectual property "safe harbor", representing a collective pool of over 300,000 patents"
Stallman would be impressed.
G. Michaels
2009-07-17 19:23:59
@David: Barring a sudden surge of ethics and integrity from Roy regarding the activity known as nymshifting by one of his close editorial collaborators, I would suggest contacting Shane Coyle directly. He might still have access to the Wordpress comment management interface and/or the httpd logs.
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-17 20:21:18
As we've seen, I'm right, too.
G. Michaels
2009-07-17 20:26:10
The only question here - beyond the fact that nymshifters and trolls will be nymshifters and trolls regardless of the medium they find themselves in - is whether or not this was planned. I think we know the answer to that, and what it means.
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-17 20:44:26
If they kept their Mono-maniacal obsessions to this site (and knocked off the outright defamation, which is wrong anywhere), no one would care. They would be "a source of whimsical merriment" as they say in The Mikado.
I mean, take a look at the collective brainpower running this place. Unfortunately--as Roy exemplifies, pushing discussion after discussion in which he and his are getting used to swab the deck off the front page with just more drivel and defamation--they have a lot of energy and they like to disrupt. As I said, they're trolls. That's why they think I'm one, and why Shane doesn't. They think I'm attacking them; Shane, smart fellow that he is, understands that I'm arguing with them.
And, unfortunately, they're extremely ill-equipped.
twitter
2009-07-18 03:06:06
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-18 04:23:44
twitter
2009-07-18 15:46:28
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-17 19:49:45
The same reasoning applies to this as to your attempt to say, "He's complaining about Stallman's supposed sexism but it's really about Mono!"
Of the people who were distressed about Stallman's "harmless little joke", I'm the only one who's associated with LiMo. So, how's this work? I'm Fu Manchu, and a whole big buncha people in the FLOSS community do what I tell them...?
Stop diverting the discussion, you're off-topic. (Troll.)
I still want to see you go a round with ConGNUcius, Roy.
twitter
2009-07-18 03:16:31
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-18 04:22:29
For expressing my opinion about Stallman?
For guys who are all so into this "free software 'advocacy'" thing, you don't seem to have a lot of regard for freedom.
I mean it's not like I denigrated women with sexually loaded so-called "jokes" or anything.
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-17 20:19:40
Well, to be frank, Roy, I don't think there's an awful lot I could do to impress Stallman at this juncture. Ask me if that worries me terribly.
(He might be interested to learn that I started out on MIT TECO, on a DECsystem-10, when I got my first paying programming job. I was a first generation user of EMACS, when it was one huge honkin' TECO macro. We exchanged a couple of emails about it back then, I'm sure he wouldn't remember. After all, he can't even remember the women he worked with on GCC...)
((Roy hasn't got even the foggiest idea what any of the preceding is about, I suspect.))
twitter
2009-07-18 03:19:26
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-18 04:28:46
And you're proposing that I got miffed at Stallman for something back in 1974, and I've been waiting all this time, insinuating myself into the fabric of the FLOSS community purely so I could wait for him to pull that joke so I could crush him...?
I think that's a stretch, Willy, but whatever. It's only a bit crazier than some of the other conspiracy theories you've come up with to explain why I'm doing this to poor, defenseless Stallman.
Has it ever occurred to you, even if only for a fleeting instant, that I might possibly simply be doing what I'm doing for the reasons I say I'm doing it...?
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-17 20:33:26
I mean, the sidebar of my blog only says
You're one crack journalist, there, Roy. I'm frankly dazzled by those investigative skills. We oughta start callin' you "Geraldo"!
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-17 20:35:44
Sabayon User
2009-07-17 21:10:14
Roy Shamwow!tz
2009-07-17 21:52:55
Willy Milliny
2009-07-17 21:53:54
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-17 22:30:46
Well, yeah, when they disagree with him.
He's flexible that way.
aeshna23
2009-07-17 18:54:59
The important issue here is the naivety of the OSI. Not many of the people on the board appear to be strategic thinkers like you have in charge of Microsoft. One idea to help them would to hire some MBA's as consultants and have them address Open Source as it were business they were trying to grow. Have them address the threats and opportunities. I doubt that report would say anything much different than what gets said here.
Another idea is to acknowledge that strategic thinking is pretty basic to the human mind. Reading Machiavelli's The Prince or Sun Tzu's Art of War is all most people need to do to start thinking about strategy the right way. Maybe we just need to get these books into the hands of the OSI board. I personally stand on street corners passing out copies of The Prince shouting "Think, or Burn in Defeat."
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-17 19:19:37
How can I "hijack" (what, am I making Roy fly us to Cuba?) the comments with postings that are quite on-topic? Roy calls the situation around Stallman "FUD", I don't see that this is the case.
Did you somehow miss the statements that Roy put into the very first paragraph of this article, and which I've been disputing?
"Hijacked"? Am I keeping you from posting or something? How's that work?
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-18 05:21:33
That's terrific. Do you wear a tinfoil hat?
Hey, you like Machiavelli, you'll like this. Have you heard about Machiavelli's next-to-last words? True story...
Machiavelli's on his deathbed, and some poor priest gets "volunteered" to go in and administer the Last Rites. He gets up to the part where he asks, "Will you renounce Satan and all of his works?" and Machiavelli replies, "This is no time to be making enemies!"
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-17 19:03:33
I'm helping to get Linux--not just a kernel, full stack--onto mobile devices. I'm working to put more free software into the hands of more people than there's ever been before. The desktop is dead, leave it to Microsoft if they want it. The handset is where it's going to be at. Google (no particular friend of free software, writing an occasional check representing about two minutes worth of profits aside) and Apple (arguably the only technology company more tightly closed than Microsoft--remember, I've worked there) recognize this.
I'm here to inform you that if you take the same approach on the handset that you did on the desktop, you'll end up in exactly the same place: not much of anywhere. OpenMoko tried to do an "free phone" and failed, pretty disastrously. The reason is that they're trying to solve a new problem with an old approach.
The fact is there are patents on all kinds of things. That's the world of reality in which one has to live if one wants to get something done. That's the world the GNOME folks and the KDE folks and most of the folks in the FLOSS community, live, too.
I'm not really sure what world you're living in.
I am, I might mention, chair of the Open Source Committee at the Foundation, and I work to ensure that the Foundation uses all the free and open source software that its members will be putting in phones responsibly and in full accordance with the applicable licenses.
But I'm not posting here as a representative of the Foundation, nor do my opinions represent theirs, nor do their opinions represent mine.
So, Moses: what are you doing in the FLOSS community? "Advocating"?
Andrew Macabe
2009-07-17 19:30:41
Roy Schestowitz
2009-07-17 19:34:06
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-17 22:34:41
Dario
2009-07-18 01:33:48
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-18 07:36:55
I do find it interesting that Roy hasn't corrected me, but really: if he claimed to be a supporter of the FSF I wouldn't believe him until I personally saw his membership card.
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-17 19:37:59
Is there a litmus test? Am I "not a Linux user" if I don't want to give money to that specific cause.
Do you support all the groups I mentioned...? No?
You freedom-hater.
Silly. Didn't you people ever learn to think? I tell you, the educational process really has gone to hell.
Roy Schestowitz
2009-07-17 19:48:19
You reflect badly on those whom you represent (not necessarily here).
Andrew Macabe
2009-07-17 19:49:27
You could've contacted and settled the "EMAC virgins" thing privately.
Yes, Columbia University has gone down the tubes. You can pick on my alma mater all you want. I think that would be next.
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-17 19:53:38
So you keep saying. But I don't think it's true, and you'd be hard-pressed to make a case that it is.
As I keep reminding you, and as you keep conveniently attempting to forget with irrelevant excursions, I'm only representing myself here, not ACCESS, not the GNOME Foundation, not the LiMo Foundation, not anyone or anything but myself.
Why do you keep complaining about attacking the messenger, Roy? Is it only okay to do if the messenger bears a message you don't like?
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-17 19:57:57
Um, I said I didn't support the American FSF, but I did support FSF-Europe. Go look again and see.
I'm not trying to "disgrace" anyone. I'm pointing out a wrong, which is what I was taught was the correct thing to do when I was young. Maybe you were taught to hide things and sweep them under the rug, but that's not the way I was raised.
If there's a disgrace here, it's in the sexually-loaded joke that Stallman told, and--more--in his inability to understand or admit that there's a problem with it. It's not about Mono, it's not about patents, it's about seeing that free and open source software development is free and open to anyone who wants to participate.
You folks don't seem to think much of that idea, which I find, frankly, baffling.
Sorry For The Inconvenience.
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-17 20:47:34
Well, people say I'm arrogant, but what do they know?
(People say I'm apathetic, but I don't care.)
Andrew Macabe
2009-07-17 20:09:28
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-17 20:50:51
Read this blog entry to understand why. When you've done so, come back and tell me it's about patents.
Fair warning: I'm serious about you needing to read it first. Don't show up for the quiz if you haven't done the assignment.
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-17 20:52:11
(The blog entry is worth reading anyway.)
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-17 21:18:41
And I did try to solve it privately: I wrote Stallman a balanced and polite letter (and please, don't anyone try to tell me how venemous and terrible it was--I enlisted the aid of a publics relations professional* to take a look at it, and got nothing but compliments on it), explained myself, and got a non-responsive response, with bonus claims of offense and victimization.
I sent a second mail, clarifying my concerns, and got a similar response. At this point, I threw my hands in the air, and sought "other recourses": I posted the email, essentially without comment.
So, what's your gripe here? I think I did exactly what you said you would, except that you possibly seem to think that the large number of folks in the audience who were unhappy about this shouldn't have said anything about it.
Maybe that's why Stallman's been able to go on telling this joke for a decade.
(While we're here, for all its closed nature, and it's closed-er than Microsoft and more autocratically run, there were some nice things about Apple. If someone, in the course of a presentation at Apple, were to tell a "harmless little joke" like the one Stallman told, they would find themselves being hustled offstage and forcibly tossed out on, not the sidewalk, but the pavement, with the information that, while the street was city property, the sidewalk was all Apple's and if they set foot on Apple property at any point in the future, they'd be cited for trespassing. They don't like that kind of "gentle fun" at Apple much. And good on them for that.)
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-17 21:42:10
Andrew Macabe
2009-07-17 21:50:01
There is none. I'm from a northern village in Amapa, Brasil, by way of the ghetto streets of RIO and at 52 I'm still learning by trying to grasp the differences in cultural behaviour and attitudes of people in developed nations.
Our team lead said to us when asking questions think of it as walking on powdered clay without leaving evidence that you've been there.
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-17 22:53:21
Andrew Macabe
2009-07-17 23:42:53
You may not think like me and the converse is also true. So therefore I speak only for myself. I am responsible for what I do and what I say.
Personally I look at the overall freedom of the individual, that is why I support and exercise gnu philosophy (primarily in the Caribbean and South America). I may not agree whole-heartily with RMS or Roy but I'm not going to nitpick at inconsistencies they may have. In the long run they contribute a lot and help others contribute even more and get involved. As I said we all do not think the same, but each of us has a contribution to make in the long run for the betterment of all (hopefully), and that is the goal.
I'm going to loose the connection in 8 min. Power is being diverted to other generators in this data center. Usually this lab is the last to come up again.
I wish you all the best.
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-18 00:05:44
You don't have to take my word for it, Andrew. You can read about it on my blog here and here
Make up your own mind.
I may not agree whole-heartily with RMS or Roy but I’m not going to nitpick at inconsistencies they may have.
Well, we differ on "inconsistencies". I'm not "nitpicking" here, the sexism that Stallman's joke expressed is a serious problem. The lies that Roy spreads via this site, and the attempts to disrupt and derail discussions outside this site by folks who, by some strange conicidence seem to be posting pretty much exactly the same tripe that Roy does (such as the attempts to claim that my criticism of Stallman is "really all about Mono") are likewise a real problem.
Stallman's made great contributions to free software. However, the behavior he showed is not the behavior a lot of people look for in a "leader", and that's what the discussion is about.
Roy contributes nothing. He disrupts community and divides people.
—Humphrey Bogart as "Rick Blaine" in Casablanca
twitter
2009-07-18 03:30:53
What PR firm, besides WE, would endorse that kind of libel?
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-18 04:32:58
I'm referring here to my initial email to Stallman, Willy, do try and keep up.
First off, I didn't say anyone "endorsed" it. It's my own views, the only one who "endorses" them is me.
Second, the PR person in question having read the letter, found it to be well written, polite, non-confrontational and reasonable in tone.
Does that help?
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-18 07:42:42
Willy, please identify this "libel" you're referring to. I haven't libeled anyone. (Psst: you can't defame someone with the truth.)
twitter
2009-07-18 15:54:12
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-18 17:05:57
That's because it was a stupid question, Willy, and if your feeble comprehension wasn't able to grasp it the other fifty times I said it, why would I imagine some hitherto-unseen light is going to dawn now...?
What PR firm is assisting you in your efforts?
None whatsoever, Willy, and I defy you to demonstrate otherwise. Check the logs--if Roy can figure how to find 'em--if you like.
ONE MORE TIME FOR THE SHORT ATTENTION SPAN THEATER CROWD:
I AM ONLY REPRESENTING MYSELF HERE. MY CRITICISMS OF RICHARD STALLMAN REPRESENT ONLY MY OWN OPINIONS, AND NOT THE OPINIONS OF ANY OTHER PERSON, ORGANIZATION, ENTITY OR CABAL. I AM NOT REPRESENTING ACCESS. I AM NOT REPRESENTING THE GNOME FOUNDATION. I AM NOT REPRESENTING THE LIMO FOUNDATION. I AM NOT REPRESENTING THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA. I AM NOT REPRESENTING THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY. I AM NOT REPRESENTING THE PLANET MARS. I AM NOT REPRESENTING ANYTHING OR ANYONE OTHER THAN MYSELF HERE, AND IF YOU HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THAT, YOU BRING IT TO ME, NOT TO ACCESS, NOT TO THE GNOME FOUNDATION, NOT TO THE LIMO FOUNDATION, NOT TO THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA, NOT TO THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, NOT TO THE PLANET MARS. YOU BRING IT TO ME.
On consideration, if you want to take it to Mars, be my guest. They won't care.
Actually, feel free to go to Homeland Security, too. They really get a big kick out of those fraudulent complaints!
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-18 17:08:22
I AM ONLY REPRESENTING MYSELF HERE. MY ISSUES WITH ROY SCHESTOWITZ ARE A PERSONAL MATTER, AND ARE NOT THE ISSUES OF ANY OTHER PERSON, ORGANIZATION, ENTITY OR CABAL. I AM NOT REPRESENTING ACCESS. I AM NOT REPRESENTING THE GNOME FOUNDATION. I AM NOT REPRESENTING THE LIMO FOUNDATION. I AM NOT REPRESENTING THE PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA. I AM NOT REPRESENTING THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY. I AM NOT REPRESENTING THE PLANET MARS. I AM NOT REPRESENTING ANYTHING OR ANYONE OTHER THAN MYSELF HERE, AND IF YOU HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THAT, YOU BRING IT TO ME, NOT TO ACCESS, NOT TO THE GNOME FOUNDATION, NOT TO THE LIMO FOUNDATION, NOT TO THE PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA, NOT TO THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, NOT TO THE PLANET MARS. YOU BRING IT TO ME.
Same thing goes about Mars and the DHS.
Roy Schestowitz
2009-07-18 18:38:10
Your message above only reveals fear. And since it was you who libeled me, you should have a think (when you are calm) about what you did.
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-17 21:07:21
And, indeed, I readily admitted it. (This is because I'm a basically honest person, Roy's opinions to the contrary notwithstanding.)
Now, here's an awfully funny thing, though: I'm not seeing Roy's name on the list of supporters, either....
Not in 2009...
Not in 2008...
Not in 2007...
Not in 2006...
Not in 2005...
Um, Roy? In the interests of full disclosure, and journalistic commitment to fairness and the truth, when you started making noise about me not "supporting the FSF", even though I support FSFE, how come you didn't happen to mention that you don't support the FSF, either?
Just wonderin'.
NotZed
2009-07-17 23:38:51
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-17 23:56:21
Andrew Macabe
2009-07-17 21:27:37
It'll be a small feather in his cap
TIA
Andrew
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-17 21:40:34
I am a FSFE Fellow.
Andrew Macabe
2009-07-17 21:54:00
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-17 22:03:24
Seeing a teenager with an iPod and lecturing them about "digital restriction management" is silly and counterproductive. It will not help spread the use of free software.
Chips_B_Malroy
2009-07-18 09:40:43
zoobab
2009-07-17 19:19:28
Actually, what is the Gnome Foundation doing against software patents?
A donation to FFII eV is welcomed if you don€´t know what to do.
Roy Schestowitz
2009-07-17 19:26:47
GNOME folks should pay more attention to people like Stallman, not to DRMers like David Schlesinger, who prefers Macs.
For all I know, David Schlesinge wrote non-Free code for Apple. I doubt he writes any Free software. OTOH, I did. All my code is GPL-licensed.
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-17 19:44:32
GNOME folks should pay more attention to people like Stallman...
Well, heck, Roy, he came to give a keynote at our conference just last week, told us all about the "Four Freedoms" (which we already knew), told us about the history of GNOME and KDE (which we already knew), and talked about his position on Mono and C# (which we already knew). Then he did this sort of a "comedy routine", I guess, except that it wasn't funny, and actually contained a very sexist joke that offended a lot of people.
So what exactly are we supposed to be listening to here? We've heard what Stallman thinks about Mono. Some people agree, some people don't. People adjust their lives and their work accordingly. Life goes on.
What's your issue here?
(And why the extraneous snipes about the software I might or might not have written. Do you want to compare credentials in software development, in community, in support for freedom? I'm game if you are, Roy. See, Roy? That was controversial, inflammatory, irrelevant and off-topic. You troll.)
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-17 19:29:29
I don't think the GNOME Foundation has taken a position like "software patents must be stamped out" or anything.
I guess the statement that Shuttleworth made about the Fluendo codecs (misrepresented on this very site, by Roy, in flagrant disregard for the truth) is a pretty representative position, "i.e. they're out there, we don't have to like 'em, but we _do_ have to deal with 'em until the laws are changed, anyway, and our priority is to ensure that our users get the capabilities they want in a way that's legal in their jurisdictions."
I AM NOT SPEAKING AS A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE GNOME FOUNDATION; THEIR OPINIONS ARE NOT MINE AND MINE ARE NOT THEIRS, ROY. AND I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH CANONICAL OR UBUNTU EXCEPT FOR KNOWING PEOPLE FROM THE FORMER AND USING THE LATTER, ROY.
Abraham "muhahahy" Posinger
2009-07-17 19:21:37
Either it is free software or software is patented. Your software stack is patented, so forget it.
"The desktop is dead, leave it to Microsoft if they want it. The handset is where it’s going to be at."
Yes. Great desktop from Microsoft.
"The fact is there are patents on all kinds of things. That’s the world of reality in which one has to live if one wants to get something done. That’s the world the GNOME folks and the KDE folks and most of the folks in the FLOSS community, live, too."
Gnome and KDE are not in the same league.
Limo is a patent cartell.
Roy Schestowitz
2009-07-17 19:31:38
TiVoised devices with DRM and patents, like iPhone.
That can't be true. David says he is a Linux advocate. I guess he wants to make Linux just like Apple, his former employer.
Salomon "centry" Polynesinger
2009-07-17 19:44:13
Anyway, the guys behind Limo are real troll geeks but EICTA also financed the Campaign for Creativity guys around Simon Gentry.
http://web.archive.org/web/20050305124006/campaignforcreativity.org/camp4creativity/
Gnome is captured. What if Gnome was started as a troll to derail KDE with license FUD. Then the Gnome Fudsters Nat and Miguel joined Novell to destroy SuSe and United Linux. You know what happened to another United Linux partner named Caldera. Or think of the gnome foundation's role in the open xml debate.
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-17 20:02:51
Hey, what if Roy is really a Microsoft troll trying to discredit the Free and Open Source Software community by making people think that it's a bunch of lunatic raving liars, when in fact no one from this site actually participates, in any meaningful way, in that community at all?
That'd make a lot more sense that your conspiracy theory.
joo
2009-07-17 19:47:57
Jeremia "Coony" Blinkinger
2009-07-17 19:58:48
Ok, I will stop it, Roy.
Roy Schestowitz
2009-07-17 20:01:42
David never took criticism well (megalomania complex).
joo
2009-07-17 20:06:03
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-17 22:09:13
I'm glad he posted the definition of "troll" which we're going by. Thanks, Roy, it makes it a lot easier to point out when you're abusing the site.
Someone should keep score or something.
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-17 20:05:40
I guess Roy's too scared to try to tackle the little test I posed nachokb, so he's "attacking the messenger" again to divert attention from it.
David never took criticism well (megalomania complex).
I don't think you're qualified to diagnose, either, Roy. I mean, you're a demonstrable pathological liar. Ask Jeff Waugh, see what he says. You respect Jeff, right? You said so.
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-17 20:10:13
Richard's tiff with TiVo is what's made the GPL v3 pretty much unusable in mobile devices, it would create all kinds of problems around certification of devices and government regulations. If you don't like what TiVo did, don't buy one, use MythTV, make your own. Writing a license around a grudge is a bad idea.
I don't think Roy has the first idea of what the body of regulations and legislation things like cell phones operate under, so you're going to have to demonstrate to me that you've got even a slight clue of what the issues are here before we proceed.
What do you know about, for example, FCC certification of cell phones in the US?
What do you know about carrier requirements?
What do you know about legislation around the operation of cell phones, like E911, for example?
twitter
2009-07-18 03:40:27
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-18 04:38:10
Spectrum scarcity had absolutely nothing to do with it. It was a highly unreliable device for which finished software never got produced. It was fit only for hackers and hobbyists, and of them, only those with a ton of patience.
Please make an effort to know what you're talking about, because your ignorance is showing. I happen to know the two folks who were the chief programmers (before one of them quit in disgust and the other kind of faded off) on the project.
Who do you know, Willy?
twitter
2009-07-18 16:11:03
twitter
2009-07-18 16:15:38
makomk
2009-07-18 16:33:04
"Limo Foundation is not open source" - a quote from said presentation.
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-17 19:33:31
Well, that just demonstrates that you're completely ignorant about both software and patents. And staking out an "all or nothing" position is a sure way to guarantee that you'll wind up with nothing. And whine about it.
Yes. Great desktop from Microsoft.
No one should care, they'll hardly be used as such within five years or so. The "desktop" is the "Swiss Army Knife" of computing devices, it does everything, but it's not good at anything.
How about them Cubs, huh?
Jesus "Holy" Spiritinger
2009-07-17 19:52:43
Roy Schestowitz
2009-07-17 21:25:02
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-17 21:57:12
That story's a year and a half old, it precedes my involvement with LiMo, and those discussions never went anywhere, as far as I know. There's certainly no Mono in the reference platform we're using within LiMo. I can say that with authority.
(BUT I AM NOT REPRESENTING THE OPINIONS OF THE LIMO FOUNDATION HERE, ROY, WHY ARE YOU HAVING SUCH TROUBLE GETTING THAT? I AM NOT SPEAKING FOR LIMO HERE, ROY! CAN YOU HEAR ME?)
Let's see... Controversial...? Sure, why not. Inflammatory...? Definitely. Irrelevant...? Obviously. Off-topic...? Unquestionably.
Roy, I demand that you stop trolling your own site.
joo
2009-07-17 22:14:27
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-17 22:22:29
—Benj. Franklin
GreyGeek
2009-07-18 18:55:26
After reading all these comments one thing seems very apparent: Microsoft has INCREASED the number of TE's assigned to you and this site. They are flooding each article with hostile comments linked with other comments on other articles by themselves and other TEs. Twisting, spinning, dodging, ducking, weaving, lying, and with plenty of ad hominem attacks to flavor their mutual love fest.
Yet, they never explain James Plamondon's mea culpa, or his belief that Microsoft has continued to employ the very same techniques first noticed, posthumously, on the Compuserv Canopus forum, initially occupied mostly by OS/2 users. Joe Barr described the TE's behavior and tactics (although he and the rest of the world did not know about James Plamondon's digital terrorists at the time) in an appropriately titled article, "SLIME" (Spin, Lies and Insults by Microsoft Employees), and included this comment:
"Online thugs, dimly lit cyberjerks who use the foulest imaginable language on anyone who disagrees with them, male or female, roam free. I recently reported the foul-mouthed William Beem to both CIS and the police for making threats. Other vermin contribute nothing but content-free ad hominem, including one pathetic munchkin who openly wishes me a horrible death. Me? I'm following Payne out the door. The stench on Canopus is more than I can bear"
The original site is gone, but here is an archived copy of the SLIME article: http://web.archive.org/web/20070912130345/www.pjprimer.com/slime.html better make a copy before "something" happens to it.
Wong's mistake was to brag about his new position as an MS TE on line when he was first hired, thus exposing himself for what he is, one of James Plamondon's creatures, a hired gun working for Microsoft. You can describe his posts as "gunning", for that is what they are and what they do. If you are on the receiving end of one of their ad hominem campaigns they could be considered Digital Terrorists. Wong probably considers himself a digital samurai. One who would employ the Slog or the set up the Stacked Panel with no moral whims what so ever about astroturfing a site which is not Pro-Microsoft. "Bidness is bidness". A paycheck is a paycheck.
Following in the footsteps of former Microsoft TE's like Segal ("Barkto"), Diamond and Shupak, Wong and the other TEs infesting the comments section here are trying to do what their cohorts did to the Canopus OS/2 forum -- hijack it or shut it down. Here is Joe Barr's account of the "Barkto" event and evidence of Microsoft's collusion: http://lists.essential.org/1998/am-info/msg01529.html
They succeeded by sheer volume of posts and relentless ad hominem attacks against any not in the Microsoft camp, in order to hijack Canopus and drive out Joe Barr and other civil people. They can't hijack this site because they don't own it and they can't turn you. That only leaves the last tactic -- volumes of self-reverential negative postings, making all sorts of claims about "defeating" or "exposing" you or what ever. I often wonder how they can read about the graft and corruption revealed the internal MS emails revealed in the DOJ or Combs trials and not resign, or at least vomit. Anyone who can read Combs 3096.pdf and still want to be a TE has the kind of morals that Plamondon was looking for.
I have a suggestion. Allowing these MS shills to share the same threads as civil folks gives them too much front page space. That is precisely how they hijacked Canopus. Just like DELL and the other PC OEMs were/are forced to keep hardware featuring Linux to back pages or face get their "air supply cut off" by Microsoft not funding ad revenues, you should move obvious TE posts to another page, referenced by a single link which marked as such and is surrounded by all sorts of disclaimers and warnings about the content contained therein.
Roy Schestowitz
2009-07-18 19:01:46
GreyGeek
2009-07-18 20:54:11
It's as fair a treatment as these egotists deserve. It is obvious that they are using the Canopus Attack method to swamp your website with the most outrageous postings possible, devoid or content, arguing over words, .... all the hallmarks of the Canopus Attack. They've got it down to an art form, like obnoxious WFW tag team members. Now you have "Lefty" threatening to sue you... classic MS tactic. That's how MS muzzled the security people into forcing them to release news of security holes ONLY to Microsoft.
Roy Schestowitz
2009-07-18 21:02:21
joo
2009-07-18 21:06:07
Lefty isn't threatening to sue Roy. He IS suing Roy. Roy just hasn't received official notice (or whatever it's called).
Roy Schestowitz
2009-07-18 21:36:01
He is not here on his own behalf. The employer is not dissociated from this because the topic discussed here is not politics, for example. If a person promotes his employer's agenda or vilifies his employer's competitors outside work (addressing the very same subject), then he or she does this for financial gain. Period.
Lefty
2009-07-19 19:35:21
He is not here on his own behalf. The employer is not dissociated from this because the topic discussed here is not politics, for example. If a person promotes his employer’s agenda or vilifies his employer’s competitors outside work (addressing the very same subject), then he or she does this for financial gain. Period.
Wow. Those are serious charges, Roy, criminal charges!
Um, you do have some actual evidence to support these claims, right...?
Roy...?
"In the UK, if someone thinks that what you wrote about them is either defamatory or damaging, the onus will be entirely on you to prove that your comments are true in court. In other words, if you make the claim, you've got to prove it! "
Lefty
2009-07-19 19:39:46
And where, exactly, did this come from? You just made it up, right?
I can discuss Linux, or cell phones, or what a liar you are, or whatever I want on my own time. It's got nothing to do with either my place of employment or with organizations with which I'm involved. Show your work here, Roy. Got some case law behind this?
eet
2009-07-18 20:31:01
Us sane Linuxers are enough opposition to righten your wrongdoings; I don't think Microsoft feels they have to dirty their hands with the likes of you. I'm afraid that's our call. We have to get our house in order.
joo
2009-07-18 20:57:47
GreyGeek
2009-07-18 21:10:00
It amazed the journalist at Wired, in retrospec, how easily he was spun by Microsoft.
And, I have NO DOUBT that you have read the emails which describe "handling" the journalist O'gara, who wrote and writes much like you.
Assign TE's to this site? When you say "we" I know you aren't referring to other Penquins or even rocks in your pocket.
Chips B Malroy
2009-07-18 21:58:27
People do not want to read though all the spam by those who troll.
Chips B Malroy
2009-07-18 22:00:33
People do not want to read though all the spam by those who troll. So many will choice not too, which is part of the objective of some who troll.
Roy Schestowitz
2009-07-18 22:06:24
BN will not be deterred by libel-spouting bullies.
To repeat what I wrote earlier, if he tries to sue me, I will sue the LiMo Foundation, ACCESS and others who may employ David for having their senior employee libel competitive threats. I would sue David too because I know better than anyone else that he libels me by suggesting that I sent Mark Fink. It is a big fat lie.
Chips B Malroy
2009-07-18 22:18:13
Be careful, the shills are working in concert. Lefty is trying to wind you up like he did me. I fell for his trap. Lefty can sue me too if he wants. ACCESS too, since according to Lefty they do not have a problem with his trolling. Come get me Lefty, bring your lawyers. Reporters too if you want them.
Roy Schestowitz
2009-07-18 22:24:27
If this is correct, then it becomes trivial to show that David Schlesinger, their senior employee, is libeling me. But I don't know know if ACCESS supports what he does here.
Lefty
2009-07-19 14:39:45
"Mr. Schestowitz, you've made some serious charges on your new site, Boycott Novell, claiming that ACCESS and the LiMo Foundation are actively engaged in criminal activity. I assume that you have some evidence to support these charges..?"
"Well... I was going to sue them and find the evidence."
"I see. Are you actually telling the court that you made these charges without having a single shred of evidence?"
"..."
"Mr. Schestowitz, please answer the question."
Lefty
2009-07-19 14:48:35
"Well..."
"Shall I show you news articles you've written, to refresh your memory?"
"Um... Okay, yes, I'm a journalist sometimes,but not on Boycott Novell..."
"We'll be getting to that, Mr. Schestowitz, I'd suggest patience. Now, in your experiences as a journalist, did no one ever point out to you that you don't claim criminal activity without being able to some something to prove criminal activity?"
"Well..."
"Mr. Schestowitz, I'm sure you must know that's the way it works. You don't get to make the claim of criminality and only then go on some sort of a fishing expedition for the evidence you imagine is there, isn't that right?"
"Well..."
"Mr. Schestowitz, as a journalist, have you even had cause to take some sort of a journalistic ethics course?"
"Well..."
Lefty
2009-07-19 15:11:39
"Hey, I'm calling long-distance and I need to talk to whoever can make Lefty stop calling me names, right now!"
"ãÆ‹Æâ¢Ã£ÆÂãâ£ï¼ŸãÆ‹Æâ¢Ã£Æâ ãâ£ãÂâ¢Ã£ââã§ãÂâ¢Ã£Ââ¹Ã¯Â¼Å¸”
"I said I need to talk to someone to make Lefty stop calling me names! What, are you stupid or something?"
”今ãÆ‹Æâ¢Ã£Æâ ãâ£ãÂâ¢Ã£ââãÂâãÂâã«ãÂâã¾ãÂâºÃ£ââãâ¬âãÂâãâÂãââãªãÂâ¢Ã£Ââãâ¬â”
::click::
Dario
2009-07-18 01:50:15
twitter
2009-07-18 03:43:16
Chips_B_Malroy
2009-07-18 09:53:11
Reader
2009-07-18 10:29:05
Roy Schestowitz
2009-07-18 12:05:02
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-18 04:39:41
Roy Schestowitz
2009-07-18 16:17:41
Dylan McCall
2009-07-18 04:03:52
The only person here who made Lefty's post about Richard "controversial" is Roy.
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-18 04:44:47
Roy demands that Mono be taken out of Ubuntu. Does he run for the UTB? No, he posts whiny, mendacious articles, one after another, and minions like Fink disrupt mailing lists like ubuntu-devel with their moronic flames, generally acting like a bunch of petulant children throwing temper tantrums until they get their way. Which they never do, because they're not really part of the FLOSS community.
Jose_X
2009-07-18 05:09:17
I'm sure you are tired after posting so much, and I will not have much time to post until possibly as late as Sunday evening UTC. I guess this means next week there will be opportunity for us to tackle important issues like software patents, mono, and sexism and other abuses. I really like the idea of you bringing us videos of sexism and other abuses in action. More should be done to make sure all women and as many groups as possible can feel comfortable using Linux to their hearts delight and participating in the community without unnecessary restraints.
Talk to you later.
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-18 07:05:06
Now, Jose, I'm sure you're a great guy when you're not babbling and babbling and babbling to no good end, and insisting you can't make up your mind about anything, and going on and on and on, and dithering and wandering...
Actually, no, I'm mistaken, I don't think you're that great a guy, after all. I guess I'd have to say that you were more of an immense waste of time. "Drug effects". Didn't take you long to abandon that moral high ground, did it, Jose?
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-18 05:38:37
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-18 14:44:36
However, Mr. Schestowitz also undertook to leave that retraction and apology visible for a week's time, which he failed to do.
Further, he made a promise at that time to endeavor to be more responsible with his reportage with regard to me, a promise he broke within a matter of hours when he began linking my criticisms of Richard Stallman's sexist "joke" at GCDS to Stallman's position on Mono, and claiming that I was "attacking" Stallman over Mono, rather than over his insensitivity.
Accordingly, I am beginning preparations to haul him into court, in the UK (a very friendly place to the defamed, as I've noted). Anyone who wants a piece of Roy, or wants to help me in my preparations to hit him with damages that will have him eating cat food until he’s a little old troll (Millions of hits a day, right Roy? Millions of eyes exposed to your libels… As I said, even at a penny a pop, we’re talkin’ real money here), please send me links to articles or comments you find here that show clear defamation or outright lies. I want to collect the whole set.
My email address is ; and if you trolls want to send me anonymous hate mail, have at it, I’ll save those too, since I believe I can demonstrate sufficient evidence (civil case, not criminal, I basically have to only show a 51% probability here, Roy) an ongoing pattern of Roy orchestrating and directing things like that.
I’m particularly interested in hearing from those who feel that they’ve been personally defamed by Roy, especially if his defamatory statements could have been easily determined to be false, i.e. by a Google search, etc. This would include things like, e.g. claims from Roy that you were being paid by, say, Novell when in fact a simple click on the link under your name would have shown that you were, say, a university student, etc.
Such things show “a flagrant disregard for the truth”, and for a “journalist”, that’s going to be a killer in court.
“Mr. Schestowitz, when you began to present yourself as a ‘journalist’, were you somehow unaware that this entailed a commitment to telling the truth, and to correcting errors of which you became aware in a full and timely fashion…?”
“Well, see, I have my thesis, and the site gets millions of…”
“This is a yes-or-no question, Mr. Schestowitz. I’m not asking for a description of your day-to-day activities.”
“I didn’t lie!”
“Well, the evidence seems to clearly show otherwise, Mr. Schestowitz. Can you account for that?”
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-18 14:46:00
lefty@shugendo.org
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-18 14:51:38
"Well, here you claimed that you had called this Mr. Fink at Mr. Schlesinger's direction. Was that true?"
"I forgot!"
"I see. And when you reported that you and Jeff Waugh had spoken on the phone about your differences and had settled them, was that true...?"
"Well........................yes!"
"Mr. Schestowitz, I have here a copy of an email from Jeff Waugh. Would you read the second paragraph to the court, please?"
"..."
"Mr. Schestowitz?"
"The only time I have ever spoken to Roy on the phone was for that ridiculous OOXML debate. It was not a personal call. There was no discussion of his unproductive behaviour or resolution of his bogus accusations."
"Hm. That seems at odds with the account you gave not moments ago, Mr. Schestowitz. Did you, in fact, not just lie to the court, moments ago, while under sworn oath to tell the truth?"
"..."
"Are you perhaps familiar with the notion of perjury?"
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-18 15:00:12
Let's not have any abrupt changes to the "no censorship" policy around here, and let's not have any disappearances of, say, pages that would constitute evidence against you.
Mr. Schestowitz, allow me to advise and caution you at this time that I have local copies in my possession of all materials I've identified on this web site and have considered to be defamatory, to me and others, reliably captured and time-stamped.
If I have to haul those out to show that have, in addition to defaming me, been deliberately destroying evidence of your defamation, I'll definitely add that onto your tab.
We clear here?
Roy Schestowitz
2009-07-18 14:52:17
Just because you don't like the truth does not make it defamatory.
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-18 15:03:17
You can tell him that you have determined it to be "factually correct" that I am a "character assassin". I'm not sure how you measure something like that objectively, Roy, so as to determine it to be "factually correct".
Care to enlighten us?
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-18 15:06:49
And just because you like something, Roy, that doesn't make it the truth.
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-18 15:13:48
- Is it the "truth" that you and Jeff Waugh settled your differences in a phone call? - Is it the "truth" that I told you to call Mark Fink? - Is it the "truth" that Jimmi Hugh censorer a Wikipedia page? - Is it the "truth" that Steve Ballmer, CEO of Microsoft, admitted that Windows 7 is "vapourware"? - Is it the "truth" that you "didn't know" Mark Fink, in spite of your numerous documented interactions with, and discussions about, Mark Fink, all prior to and leading right up to days before the claim that you "didn't know" him, when you were, in fact, very well aware of him, to the point of having offered him the editorship of a page on this very web site? - Is it the truth that you have already admitted to defaming me, in the form of a full retraction and apology, as well as a promise to endeavor to cease from such libelous behavior in the future? - Is it the truth that you broke that promise within the space of a single day?
(The last two are trick questions, Roy. Look out. I predict the sound of crickets in the misty night, under a waxing moon, for a considerable length of time, in response here. It's very peaceful.)
Roy Schestowitz
2009-07-18 15:30:01
We never confronted each other after that debate, which was carried over the phone. As I remember it, Jeff did not comment in this site afterwards and there were no tensions. I considered that a settlement or a truce.
No, but I remembered it wrongly a month later.
No, my source that sent this to me made a mistake (not intentional, see the comments in that post), so I corrected the article and explained Jimmi Hugh's real role in editing that Wikipedia article. He did have a role.
"Vapourware" includes delays and products that are based on promises, so SJVN, an IDG journalist, called it "vaporware".
I still don't know the person. "Know" as in actually know. I only remembered the name from last year.
See question 2 above. I did not remember correctly what you had asked me to do. It was about a month afterwards. I corrected this mistake as you suggested that I do.
The following promise was made by you. You asked me to write:
"I made statements that Mr. Schlesinger was attacking Richard Stallman over disagreements about Mono, rather than over Mr. Stallman’s sexist remarks at the Gran Canaria Desktop Summit, as well as suggesting that he used false names. This was wrong of me. I retract these statements unreservedly and offer Mr. Schlesinger a full apology for having made them. I will endeavor to avoid making such irresponsible statements in the future."
In my latest post I did not attribute character assassinations to you; I wrote about them in general because you libeled me (saying I was behind Fink), which shows that I too have my character assassinated with prejudice.
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-18 16:29:28
You "considered" it a truce. Evidently Jeff feels differently, but apparently you never saw fit to actually ask him about it. Okay, so we're saying, "Yes, that was a lie."
No, but I remembered it wrongly a month later.
It's interesting that your misrecollections consistently favor your version of things, but let's move on.
No, my source that sent this to me made a mistake (not intentional, see the comments in that post), so I corrected the article and explained Jimmi Hugh’s real role in editing that Wikipedia article. He did have a role.
You did not "correct the article", you simply struck through the portions that should have been removed, leaving them intact and visible to readers, search bots, etc. Your claim that Mr. Hugh "did have a role" flies in the face of the editing history, just for starts, as Gordon has very patiently demonstrated. Moreover, if Mr. Hugh did indeed "have a role", why "correct" the article at all? You can't have it both ways, either you non-"corrected" it because it was wrong, or it was right and needed no correction at all. You've both lied and shown bad faith here.
“Vapourware” includes delays and products that are based on promises, so SJVN, an IDG journalist, called it “vaporware”.
But the headline doesn't say "SJVN Admits Vista 7 is Vapourware", and it doesn't say, "Roy Schestowitz Claims That Vista 7 is Vapourware", it says "Microsoft CEO Admits That Vista 7 is Vapourware". That's clearly untrue, in fact it's (again) in absolutely flagrant disregard of the truth, and it's been pointed out to you, Mr. Freelance Journalist, and you've unaccountably failed to make a correction. (Jose says that truth is way down your list of priorities, and for once, I believe him). Big lie, Roy, big fat lie.
I still don’t know the person. “Know” as in actually know. I only remembered the name from last year.
As only became apparent when I questioned you about that email. You certainly knew of him prior to that time, based on the preponderance of the available evidence (there's that 51% thing again), and you concealed that from me with some artful wordplay worthy of Clinton ("Well, I didn't mean know "know", y' know...") This does not help persuade me that the two of you weren't in cahoots, see? A clear lie.
See question 2 above. I did not remember correctly what you had asked me to do. It was about a month afterwards. I corrected this mistake as you suggested that I do.
That's a lie right there, it wasn't a month it was a matter of days. I was conducting that discussion with you from my iPhone, in a variety of airports, as I attempted, at great length, to get back from Las Palmas. A lie squared, if you will.
I will endeavor to avoid making such irresponsible statements in the future.”
Yes, this is the promise you broke when you linked to a mono-nono article which linked to my blog and made exactly the same claim that you had undertaken not to repeat. Did you miss that fact, somehow, Mr. Freelance Journalist? So, you agree, you dealt with me in bad faith.
Great, we're pretty much on the same page. Still need those edits, though.
Roy Schestowitz
2009-07-18 16:42:21
The Mono-nono blog post, BTW, was generally about the RMS 'incident' (it was not about you and I didn't link to it with the intentions you claim).
Please provide something concrete. You constantly fail to prove that one whom you accuse actually lied. When a person does not remember something correctly, that's not a lie; Likewise when someone received incorrect information.
You are being hypocritical because you accuse me of things I did not do, so by your own standards you are a liar. I, unlike you, realise that people make accidental errors, so I didn't chase you to correct your mistakes.
Roy Schestowitz
2009-07-18 15:08:04
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-18 15:14:38
Great, Roy. Tell it to the judge.
Roy Schestowitz
2009-07-18 15:35:06
Why is that?
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-18 15:53:31
Okay, Mark Fink was really an enemy of Roy who spent some considerable amount of time, a year or two, insinuating himself into Roy's circle of Mono-haters, instigating pointless anti-Mono flamewars on a variety of development lists and blogs, and consistently offering pointers in his messages (soi disant</i) to this very site. Now, Fink was so sly, that, even though Roy exchanged comments with him, discussed him with third parties, and offered Fink the editorship of a page on the site, Roy was completely unaware of Fink's existence. Roy was completely taken in by Fink, and didn't even know him.
Fink instigated the incident which so incensed me, and then forwarded an email from Roy, digitally signed, in which Fink mentions the efforts to "get David fired" and Roy's reply, reading, "I liked what you do, but try to distance yourself from the site to give it credibility. Make it look like a personal gripe while the site keeps it polite."
When Lefty interprets "I liked what you do" as approval of the events that led up to someone pestering his manager, a situation which Fink had been chortling over on the list, he's mistaken. Roy was talking more generally, about Mark's Mono "advocacy", even though that's never once mentioned anywhere in the email.
When Lefty interprets the statements to "distance it from the site" (e.g. this site) and to "make it...personal" as directives to Mark in his future actions to cause disruption, he's also mistaken, because............I dunno.
It's all a plot on the part of this "Mark Fink" character, the Invisible Man, the Fu Manchu who has been laying in wait for poor innocent, hapless Roy all these years. Lefty is only an unwitting tool in the hands of this criminal mastermind, this Napoleon of the Underworld, Mark Fink.
Is that about right, Roy? Let me know if there are any corrections you want, it's your story, after all.
I'm pleased with it. It's a neat work of fiction.
No telling what the judge will think. People have such different tastes in literature, huh?
Roy Schestowitz
2009-07-18 16:06:58
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-18 16:34:54
Really? Occam's Razor suggests we don't multiply entities without need, and my version only requires you and me, with a supporting role for Fink.
Have you ever taken responsibility for any of your own actions, ever, in your entire life? You seem to have a lot of trouble grasping the concept, and I'm having a hard time understanding why.
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-18 16:40:26
Based on the discussion about Mark Fink, I've revised the first paragraph. Let me know how this is for you. Still need those edits for the "distance yourself" thing, please don't forget...
=============
Okay, Mark Fink was really an enemy of Roy who spent some considerable amount of time, a year or two, insinuating himself into Roy’s circle of Mono-haters, instigating pointless anti-Mono flamewars on a variety of development lists and blogs, and consistently offering pointers in his messages (soi disant</i) to this very site.
Roy knew of Fink and his various "advocacy" activities, but had never met him in person. When Roy told Lefty he "didn't know" Fink, he was deliberately attempting to mislead Lefty by making the clear suggestion that he had no prior knowledge whatsoever of Fink's existence, when in fact, this was not actually the case. =================
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-18 17:16:41
In a site at (@) http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/ Roy acts as a freelance journalist
In a site at (@) http://boycottnovell.com Roy acts as an editor. This includes Wiki editing, blog editing, and system administration
Reasonable person, Roy. 51%.
Tell it to the judge. I heartily encourage you to advise the judge of his-or-her illiteracy when your reasoning doesn't fly.
Try this on for size:
Mr. Schestowitz, the nature of the stories on your site primarily concerns things like current events in the technology industry, and the analysis thereof, is that not correct? And you also provide links to a wide variety of stories on external news sources, is that not also correct? And the masthead of this site identifies you as its editor, does it not?
Now, Mr. Schestowitz, what do you suppose a person, a reasonable person, who viewed this site, saw the variety of articles regarding current events and the analysis of those events, saw the many links to outside news sources, saw you identified prominently in the masthead as "editor", take it to be?
Roy Schestowitz
2009-07-18 17:24:15
Roy Schestowitz
2009-07-18 15:09:01
The site never presented itself as a "news" source. It is a blog.
joo
2009-07-18 15:20:28
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-18 15:29:08
Oh, Roy, Roy, Roy. I have email from you. Look at your signature, pa, right there on the nice email you sent to your budy, Fink. (I know you still "don't now" him, spare me, tell it to the court.)
You're a freelance journalist, Roy! It says so, right there!
It's incontestable that this is your email: you thoughtfully PGP-signed it with the key you've been using consistently since, what? 2004?
Hadn't you noticed? Did you fail to give a moment's consideration to what that means...? Oh, boy, Roy. That's really all I can summon up to say about this: oh, boy.
And look at your masthead! You're an editor. (Says so in the signature, too, huh? Go figure.) Did you think that was just a fun thing to call yourself?
This abattoir isn't your personal web site, Roy. That's schestowitz.com (which is exceptionally crappy web site, by the way, a real eyesore, I'd commit seppuku if something that looked ten times as good as that was associated with my name... but I digress...)
This ain't your personal blog, son! You're doin' journalism here, freelance journalism, by God, and you're doin ' it all the livelong day! You damn betcha.
(And if you were somhow laboring under the impression that blogs somehow afforded magical protection against defamation charges, I'm afraid I have to disappoint you on that. It's okay to tell lies about people in your blog, is that your legal theory here...?
Interesting.
joo
2009-07-18 15:33:44
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-18 15:38:04
Let's not monkey with that, okay, Roy? Evidence, that kinda thing.
Roy Schestowitz
2009-07-18 15:38:58
You mix granularity on purpose. I act as a columnist in Datamation (that's why it says "journalist"). The word "Editor" clearly refers to Boycott Novell, a personal blog with personal opinions.
Roy Schestowitz
2009-07-18 15:40:12
And...?
What does the rest say?
Does it say it is a news site?
joo
2009-07-18 15:49:21
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-18 15:58:26
It says you're an "editor", Roy. Your signature says you're a "freelance journalist".
What would "a reasonable person" conclude here?
Roy Schestowitz
2009-07-18 15:59:00
It's also an IRC channel and now even a Wiki that develops.
The full sentence you crop this out from says:
"“Boycott Novell” is not a blog; rather, it strives to become a community where readers and contributors share their thoughts and interpretation."
Roy Schestowitz
2009-07-18 16:02:14
It says:
Let's dissect this for the illiterate:
In a site at (@) http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/ Roy acts as a freelance journalist
In a site at (@) http://boycottnovell.com Roy acts as an editor. This includes Wiki editing, blog editing, and system administration
Dylan McCall
2009-07-18 16:03:06
Thanks for the full sentence. It is always good to have those. This sentence confirms in more detail that Boycott Novell is, indeed, not a blog, contrary to what you claimed a few posts up.
Roy Schestowitz
2009-07-18 16:09:22
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-18 16:47:16
Whatever you say, Roy. Explain it in court.
I act as a columnist in Datamation (that’s why it says “journalist”).
Good. We've agreed that you work professionally as a freelance journalist. A point of agreement, at last!
The word “Editor” clearly refers to Boycott Novell, a personal blog with personal opinions.
But since you work in the capacity of a "journalist", and this site says you're the "editor", and since you've claimed that "many people contribute to it", and since it says, explicitly on the about page that it's not a blog... What would a reasonable person conclude?
I think the answer is clear.
Roy Schestowitz
2009-07-18 16:52:05
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-18 17:10:54
Okay, so it's a journalistic web site with a chat room and a wiki. So?
Roy Schestowitz
2009-07-18 17:13:00
Roy Schestowitz
2009-07-18 15:11:14
Makes what the truth? The sentence is logically deficient.
When I present interpretation it is presented as such; when facts are presented I make my best effort to get it right.
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-18 15:36:23
You're logically deficient, Roy.
And just to help your apparently-rattled reading comprehension, I will interpret that difficult sentence for you in more simple terms. Because I'm just that kind of a guy, Roy.
The fact that Roy would like it if a putative fact (e.g. Steve Ballmer really did stand up and announce, "Windows 7 is vapourware, and you can quote me on that!") were true, does not make the putative fact itself true.
Does that help?
When I present interpretation it is presented as such;
No it isn't. And I can prove it.
when facts are presented I make my best effort to get it right.
No, you don't. And I can prove it.
We havin' fun yet, Roy? I am.
Roy Schestowitz
2009-07-18 15:41:27
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-18 16:07:41
I don't have to prove jack to you any more. I just have to show a judge, in a UK court, that there's a 51% likelihood that you've deliberately attempted to damage my reputation, interfere with my livvelihood, and whatever else I can think up.
You get to explain why I'm completely mistaken about this.
The judge gets to decide who he thinks is more convincing (51%, Roy), and that's who wins. See?
Very simple.
First, because of your shenanigans with Fink (oh, and I need the edits on that story of yours, I still have a big hole in why I'm wrong in thinking "distance it from the site" and "make it...personal" are about you directing Fink's future actions to instigate flamewars on development lists, post anonymous and inflammatory comments in blogs, call up the managers of people who express their own damned opinions, that kinda thing, okay?)
Second, because your buddy, the Chimp, offended me by posting all the contact information for ACCESS in a cheap, sleazy and particularly cowardly (he was "hoping that someone else would make the call", and I'll bet a bunch of your little hyenas are more than willing to oblige) attempt at outright intimidation. Yeah, he did it, but you're the one that's created this climate of crazy zealotry AROUND A BUNCH OF SOFTWARE that winds up doing this kind of stuff.
You're a parasite, Roy. And you tried to latch onto the wrong host. Twice.
Roy Schestowitz
2009-07-18 16:15:39
If you weren't calling people "Chimp" and provoking them, maybe you would get along better and keep the temperature down, mutually.
twitter
2009-07-18 16:36:56
There was nothing amicable about any of your involvement with this site. You have been obnoxious from start to finish and I can only hope that you are finished here. All of your communications have been insulting, threatening and dishonest. There was no effort to discuss or inform, only to harass and provoke. If you sue Roy, I'm sure that was your intention all along. If there's any damage to your reputation, it comes from your own writing.
While I do not wish such a thing on Roy, I do hope you press ahead with a lawsuit. I'm sure Roy will get lots of help and discovery will be very interesting. I doubt you have acted alone in all of this and can only hope the truth will come out in court. Any organization that comes to your defense will be instantly or further disgraced.
twitter
2009-07-18 16:58:35
Chips B Malroy
2009-07-18 21:32:50
But let me apologize to BN readers and Roy, for suggesting that I was going go to ACCESS Company and complain about Lefty's excessive negative trolling here. I got sucked into this because Lefty just seemed like some sort of Nut case, and I wanted to know what his motives were. After about 200 or 300 posts, watching Lefty insult everyone here but the resident shills and trolls, (which mostly includes M$ fans, and the fringe of some overzealot MONO people, not all are BTW) I lost it, I admit it. But I think that was Lefty's plan all along. He wanted to provoke someone into doing that. He wanted more ammo to troll with. And like an "idiot" that he called me, I fell for the trap.
I am not going to ACCESS and complain. Not because Lefty has threatened to Sue BN if I do. Yes, its wrong to threaten someone's job, but at some point, trolling and insults, attacking beyond the pale those who help GNU/Linux, then maybe it comes time that it is morally right to ask the questions.
What I do, in no way reflects this site or those that run it. I come here mostly to read the articles, and mostly those that relate to MS.
twitter: A lawsuit will be an very expense item for Lefty, falling into many international laws. He would have to have money behind him to do that, sort of like the pawn SCO did. And what will he gain? Roy devotes all his time to this site, and the site doesn't generate a lot of money. So he will not get any money. The best he could do is to shut the site down. In which case someone will pop up with a very similar site, and he will have accomplished nothing. As I have stated, he would have been better off sueing me, I am lots closer. It would still be expensive for him, or more likely the organization behind him. With no reward either. In fact, I would like that, because I could just waste whoever is behind this, time and money.
Lefty trolls here, and says he only represents himself. But uses his titles and job position at ACCESS and the Foundation to prove what an expert he is. He has also said, that his Boss at ACCESS already knows what he is doing. I believe him in that his Boss does know of his activities. My guess is that it goes further than that, and that the former PR man of ACCESS is shilling for them.
Lefty seems to have a lot of hate for RMS. Attacks him here, and all over the internet. My understanding of Access on the other hand, is a maker of cellphone software. They use the Linux kernel and some GNU on it. Sort of an almost if not completely an appliance Linux. While I tried to ask Lefty about his "35 member kernel team at ACCESS," its more likely they they did very little kernel work at all. But I could be wrong, and will be digging on information about ACCESS. Maybe ACCESS is as pure as the driven snow, or maybe they are using Lefty to go after those they dislike. Its possible.
Remember the battles for the GPL3? Linus and the kernel stays with GPL2. as he thought the Tivo issue was wrong. This might affect appliance type companies. Could this be part of what bother some of the ebedded Linux using type companies, as in attacks on RMS? Also as more and more of the GNU software goes GPL3, that ACCESS uses, it might mean something. I don't think Lefty is trolling all over the internet on his own behalf. Neither do I buy his line.
An Inconvenient Truth
2009-07-18 15:02:25
Roy,
It's pretty clear that Lefty has had enough of your backpedalling, and isn't going to fall for it any more. I would suggest you contact your legal counsel and start preparing your defence.
It's worth noting that considering Lefty has made it clear that he's going to be filing a motion now, that deleting any:
1> Articles 2> Comments 3> Logs 4> Anything akin to the above
would be a serious error, and in fact would likely be contributory to a judgement against you.
David "Lefty" Schlesinger
2009-07-18 15:05:37
Dylan McCall
2009-07-18 15:49:13
Therefore, I propose that anyone who sees David's published email exchange as an attack is clearly, himself, seeing Richard's remarks (which were presented precisely equally) as insufficient and nasty.
Lefty
2009-07-19 13:34:14
Lefty
2009-07-19 13:44:36
Come on, Chimp, take some responsibility for your addled self. I didn't make you enact your cowardly, craven, yellow, lily-livered attempt to intimidate me. "We're gonna call your job! We're gonna get you fired!"
No, nobody "trapped" you, Chump, unless trapping yourself counts. You did it, you're responsible. Roy's the one who's going to end up paying for it, but once this site is gone, you mouth=breeders might just have to find another hobby.
And Roy, when you claim that I "provoke people" by replying to an invective-filled and spittle-flecked bit of incoherency from Willy, you not looking too even-handed.
By the way, I have never complained about any of you lot "not liking me". I wouldn't want any of you to "like" me; if you did, I'd see that as a serious concern.
You're a bunch of hateful thugs, you're the abortion-clinic bombers of the technology world. I wouldn't want to have anything to do with you if it weren't for Roy's persistent and repeated libels.
Lefty
2009-07-19 13:30:06
Well, "cursing" doesn't have anything to do with me, in spite of your lies about that. Willy curses all the time, you planning on putting a muzzle on him?
And civility's in the eye of the beholder. Telling a bunch of obviously disproven lies about me doesn't seem terribly civil. Or very smart.
And Roy, accusing my company and the LiMo Fopundation of criminal activity was not very bright. Up until now, this has been solely between you and me, as it always should have been. Now, you've potentially brought some big guns into the transaction.
I never thought you were terribly bright, Roy. This clinches it. What did you imagine you were doing, anyway?
Lefty
2009-07-19 13:24:20
I've never misrepresented who I was or used any name other than my own, even if you lie about it.
If Roy makes claims like this, demand to see his evidence. You'll find he doesn't have any.
Roy Schestowitz
2009-07-18 22:19:10
Blunt lies right there in the headline.
Chips B Malroy
2009-07-18 22:24:45
Roy Schestowitz
2009-07-18 22:26:54
;-)
Chips B Malroy
2009-07-18 22:35:09
eet and joo for starters. The linsux crowd, and the M$ Shillers. They work together, some without conspiring.
Putting them on page 2 (if it were me, I would put them in /dev/null) is only a temporary solution. As they will nymshift. I suggust, only give them a couple of posts when they do that, and then the new nym goes to Page 2 as well. You cannot ever completely stop the Shillers, but you can make it hard enough on them, that they either go away, or cannot shill bomb you site.
Roy Schestowitz
2009-07-18 22:40:50
Lefty
2009-07-19 15:20:26
So there.
Chips B Malroy
2009-07-18 22:48:18
Most sites do not like to do this because it limits discussion in the comments, and requires extra work. While adding a "flag this post" button in could help, and posting rules for comments, can cut down of the work of supervising the comments.
When the site gets to a certain size, or attracts the M$ Shillers, you start to get this type of behavior. MS Watch was a good example, not because of the blogs there, but because of the comments.
Roy Schestowitz
2009-07-18 22:55:33
Chips B Malroy
2009-07-18 23:06:57
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Access_Co.
26 billion dollar company
Roy Schestowitz
2009-07-18 23:24:21
Done. I will soon draft a commenting policy (cursing, civility, and so on).
Lefty
2009-07-19 13:59:13
Show you evidence. I've only posted under my own real name, unlike Willy, for just one example, who's been shown to use numerous sockpuppets here.
Maybe he's the one "crapflooding" this site. Of course, the entire site is crap, so I'm not sure how you'd distinguish.
Lefty
2009-07-19 15:03:48
26 billion yen, you half-wit. I guess being unable to read would explain how you managed to "read" all the "pro-Mono" stuff (that isn't actually there, as even Roy has been forced to admit) you "found" on my web site.
Why don't you and your sociopathic behavior go on over the 4chan or something? They like folks like you there, Chimpster.
I mean look at yourself! First you make an idiot claim that you read "a lot of pro-Mono stuff on my web site. When I challenged you to show it to all of us, you proved you were a liar and a cowardly one at that. You couldn't bear to return to my web site--that's how horrifying the experience was for you--to produce any evidence. You couldn't even admit that you had lied through your teeth about what you had read.
Shows real character, Natty Chump-o.
Then, you get so bent out of shape because I'm calling you names (why didn't you tell my mommy on me? or get your big sister to beat me up, hm?) that you think it'd be fun to "get answers" from my employer. And you were again too cowardly to even think about doing it yourself when you did it. You were hoping that "somebody else would make the call."
Again, an incredible show of character on several levels. If I call you "Chimp", it's because you behave as if that's what you were raised by. If I call you "Chump", it's because you're as thick as two planks and as sharp as a sack of hammers. If I call you "Shemp", it's because you're the Fourth Stooge.
Is there something I'm not aware of that would suggest that I should be nicer to you? I don't even think you deserve the level of grandmotherly kindness you're receiving now.
Quit whining, you nonce.
zatoichi
2009-07-20 16:49:20
The headline which has Roy upset was posted by a user named oomfoofoo. My Digg ID is "stonemirror".
I think the claim that I've libeled Roy, at least if this headline is what he's been objecting to, is unreasonable and unfair.
By the way, I've suggested to Roy that a useful addendum to all the new policies would be a rule that a commenter who posts outside information, such as their employer's address and phone, for example (which could quite easily be interpreted as an attempt at stifling and intimidation) should be summarily banned permanently from the site.
What do you think about that suggestion, Mr. "Malroy"?
Lefty
2009-07-19 14:52:33
Even if that were indeed the case, they're not my blunt lies, Roy. I didn't post that, so take your complaints up with whoever did.
Haven't I told you: I don't tell lies. You do. Maybe you can prove me wrong by posting a demonstrable lie that you can actually attribute to me, hm?
zatoichi
2009-07-20 16:53:14
Since I've pointed out that I didn't post this to Digg, Roy, shouldn't this completely erroneous claim on your part be corrected?
Lefty
2009-07-19 19:13:28
"n the UK, if someone thinks that what you wrote about them is either defamatory or damaging, the onus will be entirely on you to prove that your comments are true in court. In other words, if you make the claim, you've got to prove it! "
zatoichi
2009-07-20 18:43:53
Dylan McCall points out that the W3C Validator reveals that this very site "contains exclusive design elements that only Internet Explorer users can see, which are probably patented to boot!"
Greg K-H lets us know that "Microsoft has released their Linux Hyper-V drivers under the GPL version 2, and have submitted them for inclusion in the main Linux kernel source tree."