did those so-called "threats" against Enderle come from the SCOG?
did those so-called "threats" against Enderle come from the SCOG?
Posted Sep 25, 2007 11:34 UTC (Tue) by mingo (guest, #31122)In reply to: Why the hell I posted a link to that trash by corbet
Parent article: SCO, Linux and Rob Enderle: A Conclusion (TG Daily)
Note that Enderle's logic fails yet another time, in a crutial way: has he done due diligence to establish that indeed it was a member of the Linux community who "threatened" him online? How does he know that it was not in fact SCOG supporters who threatened him, to make the "Linux community" look "criminal"?
Now that he has apparently acknowledged that SCOG has lied to him, wouldnt it be the logical conclusion to attribute those threats to the same entity that deceived him once already - namely SCOG and its supporters? If he cannot prove it, shouldnt he write another mea culpa article and apologize for calling the Linux community criminals?
Enderle's so-called "apology" raises more questions than it answers.
Posted Sep 25, 2007 14:05 UTC (Tue)
by man_ls (guest, #15091)
[Link] (4 responses)
At least Lyons had the decency of offering a frank apology.
Posted Sep 25, 2007 14:37 UTC (Tue)
by felixfix (subscriber, #242)
[Link] (1 responses)
When SCO first announced Linux had stolen code, it was obvious to most of us that they were bare faced liars. It should have been a clue to these pundits when SCO refused to show the millions of lines of code, and when SCO did show a few samples and were exposed as liars for the rest of the world to see, these pundits still had no clue.
Why these clowns were blind is obvious: they were shills for the industry big shots. I don't mean in the direct pay of Microsoft, but they were beholden to the big shots for their scoops and "insight" and had long since lost any ability to think independently or dig for news on their own. Compare them to Cringely, who is not always right, but at least has half a brain and is not afraid to use it to speculate intelligently.
These pundits should be put out to pasture. They have passed the point of having any utility.
Posted Sep 26, 2007 17:13 UTC (Wed)
by dmarti (subscriber, #11625)
[Link]
Posted Sep 26, 2007 3:36 UTC (Wed)
by ncm (guest, #165)
[Link] (1 responses)
First, he didn't offer an apology. The closest he came was "mea culpa", which means "I made a mistake", or "it was my fault". Without the actual apology, it amounts to, "I was wrong, suck it."
Second, what he did write wasn't frank. It differed from Enderle's screed in being smooth, which enabled him to distract us from the real issue, which is that he's a lazy and incompetent reporter who is frequently wrong for simple, correctable reasons he'd like us not to dwell on.
Indeed. The dork confesses that he is easy to manipulate; trying to blame others for his shortcomings is really pathetic.
It wouldn't be surprising.
Both Lyons and Enderle suffer(ed) from the same problem: their knowledge of the FLOSS community is pitifully weak. Their only knowledge of the IT industry is the big shots. Their fondness for the movers and shakers has blinded them.It wouldn't be surprising.
There is a feedback loop, though. ("Lyons effect"?) Make a mistake about Linux, and potty-mouth trolls call you mean names. Then you say Linux users are potty-mouth trolls who call people mean names, and more potty-mouth trolls call you more mean names. Pretty soon the only people who are willing to talk to you are potty-mouth trolls, and the only thing they're willing to tell you is that you're some mean name.Feedback loop
Actually, Lyons did not offer a frank apology.
Frank apology