WE are not fans of SD Times, especially because the repeated promotion of Microsoft software and partly because of the Mono apology and sometimes honesty, which magically vanished [1, 2], only to be resurrected in several places. We expected to see those involved pretending that it was "an accident" (we even wrote this when we reasoned about the nature of the apparent censorship), but it was not an accident.
Miguel - I did write this as a single story that was broken up for print and the Web. It has since been merged back together, and this blog is linked in the story. Sorry for any misunderstanding, as I believe your comments were fair and balanced.
“Miguel de Icaza and his followers, some of whom are from Microsoft, have been attacking Groklaw, Jeremy Allison, and Boycott Novell like creationists sometimes attack or terrorise scientists.”But in any event, the latest quotes from Miguel de Icaza say quite a lot (he does not deny them). As someone in Slashdot pointed out, "When Stallman said the same thing, de Icaza called him a fanatic. Well, most voices on /. called him the same thing. He was right then like he was right with his movement from the start. You can't have half-measures."
Miguel de Icaza and his followers, some of whom are from Microsoft, have been attacking Groklaw, Jeremy Allison, and Boycott Novell like creationists sometimes attack or terrorise scientists. They attacked anything and anyone who 'dared' to warn about the dangers of Mono -- dangers whose existence is confirmed by Miguel de Icaza himself.
The Source breaks apart Miguel's apology in an excellent way, so check out the entire post which begins with an explanation of how the censorship came about and how it was covered up:
Aspect the First: The Disappearance
The “disappearance” is explained by Mr. Worthington (the article author) on Twitter as so:on my recent .net evolution stories – nothing was pulled. they were just merged into one. http://www.sdtimes.com/link/34183Mr. Alan Zeichick, the editorial director of BZ Media explains it here on this blog in a comment as so:My apologies — the story is not “taken down” from sdtimes.com, and there’s nothing nefarious going on. The story had been erroneously posted in several small pieces. When we saw the error, we reassembled it on Mar. 23. The entire piece, including that complete section (about hallway down), is at http://www.sdtimes.com/link/34183I don’t know the workings of a media empire. I only know when I tried to verify the quotes, they were not to be found in any article.
There’s some strange things to me about the SD Times article:
* It’s strange timing that the article “disappeared”, a lot of people noticed, and then it “re-appeared”. * It’s strange the article dates are 7 days apart and the Mar. 17 article was “rolled back” into the Mar. 10 article. * It’s strange that the “entire piece” is the longest thing by far Mr. Worthington has ever written for SD Times.[1] * It’s strange that the whole “out of context” defense popped up – more on that in a bit.
But strange things do happen sometimes – so let’s move on.
Aspect the Second: The Quotes
Since Mr. de Icaza has claimed ownership of the quotes, we can dig into the juicy stuff! That’s all I wanted to do anyway!
In his blog, Mr. de Icaza starts off his explanation:It seems that David’s article on Windows strategy tax on .NET lacked enough context for my actual quotes in there.But on Twitter, Mr. de Icaza seems to think the article was excellent:@dcworthington I am in whole agreement with you there; Btw I loved the article, good balance.
Comments
Agent_Smith
2010-03-27 04:26:25
Needs Sunlight
2010-03-26 16:32:59
Mono is a big danger. Yes, the patents are killer, but there's more. Mono /MS.NET truly suck both to develop on and for the end user. Neither are the true danger. The true big danger is that the Microsoft way of thinking becomes common: the idea that technology is supposed to be expensive as all hell to implement and operate and that it should be hard to use. These ideas are spread by infected individuals as they force entry into successful projects.
Dr. Roy Schestowitz
2010-03-26 16:40:59
I have added an update (just 10 minutes ago) to quickly rebut the usual party line from Byfield. If there was any "disinformation" as he put it, it was de Icaza's and Worthington's. What I wrote was based purely on the output they produced and everyone can check this to see for oneself.