> As for what was in the article, I said that a suitably cynical mind
> could see their actions as furthering the interest of their project.
> That is demonstrably true: that idea was raised in the discussion.
Ted raised it once and when i asked him for what he really meant, i got no response (i bet you
too won't tell me what on earth i was supposed to gain from all this). on the other hand, i
did explain, far too many times for my taste, how kernel devs covered up security bugs. i
don't see how that's insulting when they even admitted it themselves. most of the discussion
was all about their trying to justify that fact, not disputing it. see the difference?