Am I the only one who sees the irony in the semi-troll nature of some replies.
I also agree with t0p regarding the posting of personal info online
Considering that this 'twitter' person[1] and his friends try to get people fired (including Canonical employees)[2][3] for not joining in on his FUD campaign against Mono, I'm not so sure it's "unfair" to post his personal information.
I'm not saying that I would do it, but I would understand if someone did. These guys have already gotten personal, they have no one to blame but themselves.
1. Proof of twitter's sock puppetry: http://slashdot.org/~SockDisclosure/journal/214377
2. Here's the opening message to a mailing-list thread on ubuntu-devel-discuss which throws accusations of Canonical censoring anti-Mono trolls, attempts to get people fired, etc: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ub...ne/008447.html
3. One of the 2 guys BoycottNovell tried to get fired: http://opensourcetogo.blogspot.com/2...wdry-tale.html
You'll notice that Roy Schestowitz, twitter and their friends told David Schlesinger that they never heard of Mark Fink before June 12th, yet they linked to the mailing-list thread on June 9th (this evidence was just discovered the other day at http://boycottnovell.com/2009/07/15/...#comment-70170 ). Roy Schestowitz also offered to let Mark Fink edit the BoycottNovell website and they had engaged in multiple conversations over the course of the year on Roy's very own website.
(The other guy they tried to get fired is Dave Seigal who is a recent hire at Canonical and who was not even involved at all in the mailing-list thread, he seems to simply have been a target because of his work on GNOME-Do)
From the evidence (Roy attacks Ubuntu for "Anti-Mono Censorship" on June 1st, June 6th, and June 9th + linking to Mark Fink's flamewar on u-d-d as "evidence" that Ubuntu was censoring + the PGP signed email where Roy Schestowitz pats Mark Fink on the back for the flamewar he started on u-d-d), it looks Roy Schestowitz orchestrated this whole thing in order to incite people against Ubuntu's inclusion of Mono.
Articles falsely accusing Ubuntu of censorship:
1. http://boycottnovell.com/2009/06/01/...ition-to-mono/
2. http://boycottnovell.com/2009/06/06/...no-by-default/
3. http://boycottnovell.com/2009/06/09/...ue-for-ubuntu/
Here's a recent smear against Matt Zimmerman (CTO of Canonical in case you didn't know): http://boycottnovell.com/2009/07/16/...s-mono-center/
The insinuation is that Matt Zimmerman is only speaking out against sexism in RMS's recent GCDS talk because he's a Mono supporter.
What's interesting to note, there don't seem to be any Mono developers speaking out against RMS at all. So where does this misguided (I'm reusing Matt Zimmerman's term because he is absolutely correct) accusation come from?
Last edited by alternatealias; July 18th, 2009 at 02:29 PM.
Bookmarks