I think it’s his real name, but I wish people knew why he loves Mono so much that he posts many hundreds of comments defending it at every chance. That’s all the disclosure I want. He can’t pretend to be foreign to Mono.

You said “exaggerated lies”?

“Dan O’Brian” – again, is that your given name? Answer me that one question. If it is a pseudonym, then you are “haunting” Roy because you’re a disembodied, anonymous, hostile entity.

I could have used a stronger word, but I refrained, so don’t tell me about exaggeration. Just tell me if “Dan O’Brian” is your given name or a pseudonym.

I have to give the proprietor high marks for adding a “feature” to his blog that is used one day later (one whole day!) to complain that it’s being used for nefarious purposes. It’s almost as if he did it on purpose. Is this “story” going to be used for future link splashes as “proof” that the minions of evil are hounding him? Possibly. Although I’ve noticed he doesn’t use the Jimmi Hugh hit job very much. Which reminds me Roy – maybe you should take Roy Bixler’s advice and do a follow up on that, it would be super entertaining!

And Paul Gaskin, I hope no one ever ties your “balzac” comments on the IRC logs about your supposed exploits at titty bars to your real identity. I bet that won’t go over well with potential employers. That is, unless you can actually convince Richard Stallman of selling plush GNUs for $50 a pop and advertise them here, haha.

Oh, and I almost forgot. Will (er, “twitter”), have you thought about becoming a science fiction author? You have the most amazing knack for making up unbelievable stories and trying to sell them as plausible, even though everyone reading them knows they’re, well, completely implausible. Let me know if you want to continue on this “it was all an experiment” track, I have lots of Slashdot links that you’d have a blast trying to explain in that context.

He’s attacked them on far more times and on far more sites than I’ve even mentioned Roy or BN.

You guys are hypocrites and you keep proving that you are more guilty of the things you accuse others of than the people you accuse.

Time and time again.

You get all upset when I mention “twitter” because you dislike it when “guilt by association” is used, yet it is the cornerstone of all of your arguments against me, Novell, Mono, etc.

Mono is “guilty until proven innocent” due to it being associated with Novell (or “guilty until proven innocent” due to it being associated with Microsoft).

I’m “guilty until proven innocent” because you accuse me of working for Novell (which I do not).

Guilt by Association. You guys use that logical fallacy every day on this website. It is the cornerstone of nearly ALL of your arguments.

I’m sorry, but no one is going to buy your exaggerated lies, Paul.

I would argue that “Dan O’Brian” has crossed that threshold into the inappropriate and unreasonable by his persistence, his wide spread commentary on many different sites, and over a significant span of time.

I might call that “cyber-haunting” someone with “negitude”.

And you are trying to censor me by trying to get everyone to throw out my arguments with the bathwater based on who they are coming from. That is a form of censorship.

When disclosure leads to censorship – they aren’t separate.

Disclosure never leads to censorship in our case.

It’s the old debate about reasons for disclosure. Censorship/suppression and disclosure are separate things.

You have vested interests too.

If someone from Novell posts here, there are vested interests at play.. Very significant ones in fact.

Sarcasm aside, I don’t know how I feel about letting Novell employees, for example, just comment here anonymously without it being flagged.

You present your name as “Dan O’Brian”. Is that really your name? If not, don’t keep up the charade, because if it is discovered who you are through some network forensics, or something which gives you away, it will be very embarrassing.

So be careful here before you continue. If you’re not planning to disclose your identity and your employer, it’s a good idea to go away.

BTW, you keep mentioning people who go online under their own names. Your problem is that you’re trying to “go hard” against a public name while keeping your own anonymity. That’s a more dangerous game than anyone else is playing.

That really makes for a hot forum. Anonymous 5-star voting may be good for movie reviews, but it’s not very interactive. But it was good fodder for conversation about astro-turfers.

I’ve been lobbying Roy to upgrade from WordPress to Drupal so he can have the kind of forum which really supports a complex social environment with cliques, vendettas, and such.