I just refuse to be cowed by their patents.

Roy Schestowitz said,
December 18, 2008 at 9:25 am

I’ve just wasted 10 minutes trying to find an E-mail I was unable to find.

Why is it that you always lose the email and/or the person doesn’t want what they say to be repeated publicly?

Is it because these “sources” are all in your imagination?

If it was from rmh@debian, I’m not interested

No, my purpose here is to correct the “facts””

It very much reminds me of the “Get the facts” campaign motto…

” you present in your attacks on free software projects. I could care less who the messenger is; in this case it happens to be you, on other sites it’s other people. Doesn’t matter. Attacks on free software are attacks on free software.”

Well, Novell patent-protection-racket agreement with Microsoft is Nº 1 attack on free software. SW Patents are the threat, the weapkn. And Microsoft is the attacker (with Novell as accomplice), not Roy. Why don’t you criticize that in the first place? It entails danger for anyone using any technology related to microsoft (Mono, Silverlight, MSOOXML) -except those who pay MSFT for “protection”- .

Back to personal attacks, I see…

I know what some Debian developers are saying.

If you think you can label OpenSUSE on the basis of a single bug, then I guess that’s where we fundamentally disagree.

Debian’s decision to stick with Mono is partly influenced by Ubuntu’s (Canonical’s) policy.

Can I expect to see any proof at some point, or are we sticking with the time-travel-based option?

You know the real problem here, Roy? The absolute crux-of-the-matter problem?

By not only constantly saying things which are verifiable wrong, but attempting to twist reality until you can somehow pretend you’re right, your credibility is slashed in the process. You’re not a guy who makes mistakes on occasion, you’re a guy who will defend outright lies to the death.

And with your credibility swirling lower than the National Enquirer, and your ethics somewhere below Bill O’Reilley or Ann Coulter, how can anyone believe ANYTHING you say? Even when you’re actually right, people ASSUME YOU’RE WRONG.

You’re the boy who cried wolf, Roy.

If you could grow up and ADMIT YOUR MISTAKES, it would help your credibility. As it stands, it couldn’t go any lower.

Note: comment has been flagged for arriving from an incarnation of a known (eet), pseudonymous, forever-nymshifting, abusive Internet troll that posts from open proxies and relays around the world.

[T]he only issue on the table is the X.org bug, and no-one is denying that. What is wrong, though, is extrapolating from a single bug and saying that the whole distribution is “fat”.

…bar the X.org problem.

Oh, I see…. let’s just remove the inconvenient facts.

You’re referring to something that I uttered in an IRC channel. How pathetic. Moreover, Debian’s decision to stick with Mono is partly influenced by Ubuntu’s (Canonical’s) policy. See Fedora’s remarks for insight into the sheep effect (“everyone is doing it, so..”).

I find it absolutely hysterical that you call on people publicly to apologise for pointing out the errors in your original article, even though they’ve been demonstrated time and again.

That’s correct

Absolute, 100% verifiable, complete and total lies.

Here comes the alarm!

LIE ALERT! LIE ALERT!

Here’s the PROOF that you’re a liar:

The first entry of Mono into Debian is here:

mono (0.13-1) unstable; urgency=low

* Initial release.

— Alp Toker Sun, 28 Apr 2002 22:10:10 +0100

Ubuntu didn’t even EXIST when Debian was adding Mono to the archive. It didn’t exist for another two years.

You still claim that Mono in Debian is the result of some kind of pressure from Ubuntu? How deluded ARE you?

and I’ve already defended this in the discussion about the second post/link.

You defended it by lying more!