Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 12:38:34 -0600 (CST) From: RacerX <racerx@makeworld.com> To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Re: SPAM: Score 3.7: Re: Instead of freebsd. com, why not... Message-ID: <20050217123730.O79252@makeworld.com> In-Reply-To: <2810734464.20050217192707@wanadoo.fr> References: <9C4E897FB284BF4DBC9C0DC42FB34617641B03@mvaexch01.acuson.com> <128456842.20050217185105@wanadoo.fr> <2810734464.20050217192707@wanadoo.fr>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 17 Feb 2005, Anthony Atkielski wrote: > RacerX writes: > >> That is a very harsh statement ... > > It's a very realistic statement. > >> Now that you have made it; show us the proof that you base your reply >> on. > > I've explained it at length on many previous occasions. > >> Show us the urls that says what you said. > > Why are URLs more reliable than what I say? What about URLs on my own > site? > >> Show us the white papers that state what you have stated. > > Why are whitepapers more reliable than what I say? What if I'm the > author of the whitepaper? > > -- > Anthony > Then show us your proof - I do. I have a section on my site dedicated to FBSD as a desktop using various versions from 2.2.1 on up to 5.3-RC
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050217123730.O79252>