Re: NATHAN and the FAQ Dilemna

[pfg@yallara.cs.rmit.EDU.AU (Paul Francis Gilbert)]

nathan@visi.com (Nathan Mates) writes:

>In article <61eklj$4pi$1@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au>,
>Paul Francis Gilbert <pfg@yallara.cs.rmit.EDU.AU> wrote:
>>Agreed. The point to notice is that Nathan was given FAQ maintainership
>>by the c.s.a2 community. 

>   Bzzzzzt! Wrong! Look, silly, when the heck are you ever going to
>put forth a fact that's in any way near correct? When you do do that,
>instead of just opinions masquerading as "gospel", we'll be sure to
>alert the media.

In contrary to YOUR informed opinions, I suppose? I'm going to refrain
from trying to get into an insult match with you... that seems to be
your response to anyone whose opinions differ to yours.

Are you seriously saying that you obtained FAQ maintainership without
the CSA2 community's knowledge? Did God come to you in a vision and say
"Nathan Mates, thou shall maintaineth the CSA2 FAQ."? Did you do a secret
deal with the previous maintainer to take over without the knowledge of
the CSA2 community? 

>   And as for the "nice and civilized" charge for Turkey, you've
>obviously never seen the parts of Turkey's web site (which do exist,
>on his site now, in search engines, and backups made by many people)
>where he HAS ripped on people just as bad as others have ripped on
>him.  Turkey's the con artist, presenting one face to you in public,
>while those who look closer see the real truth. Is that behavior of
>being a twofaced whitewashed tomb in ANY way better than those who
>present the same opinion in private and public? You may disagree with
>that opinion,, but you seem to value honesty less than politeness,
>which is plain stupid.

And as I said: you should post some examples to support your claim. Don't
expect everyone to go searching through his site for dirt. If you claim
there's dirt on certain pages, then quote examples, or specific page and/or
locations. And also show that this dirt (if it in any way relates to you)
was present before you started slinging him.

I don't value honesty less than politeness, but I use politeness as an
integrity level. If someone continually uses abusive language, I'm less
likely to listen seriously to their opinions. It's the same the world over.
If you're abusive to people, even if you have opinions that are accurate,
people are still less likely to listen to you.

Which was why I said earlier that if you want to sling Turley, at least
keep it factual. Accusing someone of being a 'druggie, attention deficient
syndrome [wasn't it], etc.' is more likely to make people wary of you then
Turley.

Someone a while back posted a really good article. It pointed out that
with your abusive language, newbies would automatically side with Dr. Tom,
which, he felt, was a pity, since he had in the past been a pirater 
[although it didn't mention the present, which I'm unsure about, but I tend
to like to give the benefit on the doubt].

Okay?

PS: You mentioned a while ago about blocking a site which had put up some
pirate programs. How about some details? Was it Apple software? And who
was responsible for doing it?

>   Turkey is doing a good job of hiding his bad side from you. Pull
>those blinders off and see the truth one of these years.

>Nathan Mates


>--
><*> Nathan Mates http://www.visi.com/~nathan/      <*>
># This posting is copyright Nathan Mates, and may not be reprinted
># in full, partial, or quoted form on any archive site associated with
># Charles Turley. 
--
Paul Gilbert           | pfg@yallara.cs.rmit.edu.au
Bach App Sci, Bach Eng | The opinions expressed are my own, all my own, and
Year 4, RMIT Melbourne | as such will contain no references to small furry
Australia	       | creatures from Alpha Centauri.