Jeff isn't defending the indefensible, he's being asked to defend the risible straw man. Jeff rebutts it specifically point-by-point, but he's essentially shadow boxing because Roy never accepts the answer, he shifts onto some other piece of equally unsupportable nonsense. If Roy even did *basic* research, he'd know the "Novell OOo" he's so worried about is carried by, oh, every single Linux distribution bar SuSE.
If Boycott Novell did a. basic research, b. issued *real* corrections (not "correction , see comments below"), c. stopped re-gurgitating material proven wrong, and d. stuck to the facts, I would bet few people would have a problem with it. It would get fewer readers and generate less advertising revenue though, so I don't see that happening....
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
Re(1): Only one request
Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 87.194.162.201] on December 04, 2007 08:33 AMStarting an argument with an ad-hominem isn't a great start, a false one at that.
Take a look at this prime example of "Boycott Novell investigation":
<a href="http://boycottnovell.com/2007/11/27/novell-gnome-openoffice/#comments">
http://boycottnovell.com/2007/11/27/novell-gnome-openoffice/#comments</a>
Jeff isn't defending the indefensible, he's being asked to defend the risible straw man. Jeff rebutts it specifically point-by-point, but he's essentially shadow boxing because Roy never accepts the answer, he shifts onto some other piece of equally unsupportable nonsense. If Roy even did *basic* research, he'd know the "Novell OOo" he's so worried about is carried by, oh, every single Linux distribution bar SuSE.
If Boycott Novell did a. basic research, b. issued *real* corrections (not "correction , see comments below"), c. stopped re-gurgitating material proven wrong, and d. stuck to the facts, I would bet few people would have a problem with it. It would get fewer readers and generate less advertising revenue though, so I don't see that happening....
#