From owner-freebsd-chat Wed May 5 19:15:15 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from zippy.cdrom.com (zippy.cdrom.com [204.216.27.228]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C2BB14E3A for ; Wed, 5 May 1999 19:15:12 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jkh@zippy.cdrom.com) Received: from zippy.cdrom.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zippy.cdrom.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA38918; Wed, 5 May 1999 19:15:31 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jkh@zippy.cdrom.com) To: Brett Glass Cc: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: PCWeek article by Anne Chen -- Comments In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 05 May 1999 15:59:15 MDT." <4.2.0.37.19990505155301.04422590@localhost> Date: Wed, 05 May 1999 19:15:30 -0700 Message-ID: <38914.925956930@zippy.cdrom.com> From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > Easily said by someone who's PAID to work on FreeBSD. I've never made any secret of the fact that WC pays my salary and pulling it out to defend your argument only shows how tenuous your position in this whole sorry argument is. I mean c'mon, let's be honest about basic Brett Glass 101 here: It's *always* been your pattern to cop-out when actual action is called for, attacking whatever random issue you can manage to snag out of the air in hopes of changing the subject, and this is no different. The number of people who have contributed effective advocacy for free makes the question of who's paid and who's not irrelevant to this discussion and it's almost as ridiculous as your frequent assertion that "everything people have been doing is obviously ineffective because Linux is willing", a highly defeatist argument which is both insulting to the current advocates and seriously unlikely to bring any new ones to the table, also making a mockery of your claims of wanting to help the project's advocacy program. Oh, but what a profitless exercise to attempt to point *this* out to you! The screams and denunciations! You're the guy yelling loudly, as he retreats from the fight, about how effective and brave he fighter is and anyone who says otherwise is just a big liar. You just can't argue with this guy about what a shmuck he is, so deep is is own self-delusion, and they usually have him typecast in all good chinese martial arts comedy movies, wearing big teeth and hiding behind his buddy who can actually fight (and who gets to end all the fights this wacky guy starts). Maybe this is funny for a non-western audience, but I've never found it very funny in these movies and I don't find you very funny for the same reason. :-) > We're down to 2 guys because the sergeant shot the rest. Shooting So far as I've seen, I've only shot down one or two guys who'd gone totally battle crazy and were as much a danger to their own men as to the other side. I see plenty of people in the FreeBSD advocacy trenches, alive and miraculously un-holed for people who've been "shot", and one guy running rapidly away towards the rear, screaming something about running away not being his idea at all on account of him being very fearless and brave, it's just the damn *seargent's* fault that yadda yadda... Sorry, I lost it, he was moving fast and went rapidly out of audible range. :) - Jordan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message