Why the Ad Hominem Attacks on Daniel Pocock Typically Backfire (as One Should Expect)
They tried to cancel and muzzle him. They keep failing at it. Sensible people can see who the real offenders are.
YESTERDAY Mr. Pocock published his first article in two weeks (mind dates, this is the latest). He said: "Public Health England tells us that three suicides constitute a suicide cluster. While we can't speculate about Siddall's cause of death, it seems reasonable to ask, in a general sense, is Debian hiding a suicide cluster?"
Of course it does!
Why else would it viciously attack the person who merely talks about abuse of women, underage work, suicides, and chronic fatigue?
Debian is still the base or template for loads of distros, even this new one called eLxr, and that does not mean that Debian is above criticism. The same goes for GNOME. Blind respect or even admiration is the hallmark of autocracies or monarchies.
A lot can be said about the methods used to silence Mr. Pocock and the methods used to hijack GNU/Linux projects, ban some commentators etc.
The case of Mr. Pocock is particularly interesting because he was viciously attacked in spite of contributing a lot, usually for free, since the 1990s. █