Summary: Quick response to Internet trolls and other detractors who attack the platform and the messenger rather than tackle the message

TECHRIGHTS contains over 12,000 blog posts and 53,400 pages from the site are said to be contained in Google at this moment. With sheer volume comes greater risk of error but not greater frequency or likelihood of error. We always correct errors when they are found. Back around 2007 we rebutted claims challenging the integrity of this site, but the process is time consuming and it plays right into the hands of those who try to smear the messenger and the messenger's platform, as opposed to the actual message. Even right now we are finding false claims made against the site, we are seeing fabricated (para)quotes, and there is insistence that certain truisms claimed in this Web site are in fact false. We cannot reply to each false claim from a detractor, especially due to the volume of complains arriving from all the usual suspects, whose vested interests are simply under threat by this Web site. Some of them are currently flaming me in Twitter and Indenti.ca. When I politely pointed this out a conversation started that contained yet more lies about me, which only proved my point. If those lies are challenged, the trolls will just carry on and on ad infinitum, so it's a battle that cannot be won. If they are ignored, they herald victory, but at least no time is wasted on them. I spoke about this problem in last night's show and it's simply more of a distraction which detracts from the real topics that we ought to cover (we fell behind over a month ago). Wayne and others who support our site have responded to some of the trolls (accounts whose sole purpose is to heckle Techrights and berate me). Wayne has attempted to summarised some key points later on. I think he raised some important points, e.g.:

There wasn’t very much, so I read the whole works. Apparently @rclayton pops up every couple of months, makes a series of attacks, and then disappears. Whoever it is sends fake replies to other users, to make it appear like the other user is in agreement.

[...]

I did hear about Jason Melton’s article Mono Criticism == Uninformed Hatred, though until I read it a few moments ago, I didn’t know it was a discussion of Guy van Sanden’s Get the Facts on Mono, which drew 58 comments, some of them rather vitriolic, for a straight forward, unemotional discussion of the disadvantages of Mono. Guy followed up with Cleaning Mono from your system, which drew a another slew of comments, including the mention of the Ubuntu Saner Defaults Remix, which I’m downloading now, that will be what, maybe thirty distros that I haven’t had time to try yet?

Jason then followed up with Banshee, Mono, and Reddit, which covers the issue of Banshee using items that are not covered by Microsoft’s Community Promise, at least not in the version available for download from the Banshee page. He then followed it up with Mono: Unsafe At Any Speed, where he takes five popular Mono applications, and evaluates them to see if they are using the ‘safe bits’ (ECMA) of Mono. None of the five applications tested (Banshee, Tomboy, F-Spot, Do, and GBrainy) are using only the safe bits, all work outside the ECMA specifications.

So there are some rumblings. I think I’ll add to them. Throwing gasoline on fire is one of those innocent pleasures…

Be sceptical of claims you find about Techrights because people don't take criticism too well and rather than debunk true claims which they are not comfortable with they decide to attack the messenger and/or the platform. Even worse tactics are later being used and it includes legal threats that we don't comment on publicly. ⬆

"In my role as Wikileaks editor, I've been involved in fighting off many legal attacks. To do that, and keep our sources safe, we have had to spread assets, encrypt everything, and move telecommunications and people around the world to activate protective laws in different national jurisdictions."

--Julian Assange