Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us> wrote:

>So much for free speech. Personally, I don't agree with either SCO's
>actions or logic. There are many good people still employed by SCO
>and I suspect many are stuck with my dilemma. How can I defend a
>company without also defending its stupid management actions? I don't
>have an answer. I've kept my big mouth shut in newsgroups and mailing
>lists because any defense of SCO would probably be viewed as a defense
>of SCO's point of view. I probably shouldn't have scribbled this
>message. However, I take a dim view of warped facts and thought some
>comments might be useful.

Your comments were worth writing.

I haven't kept my big mouth shut and never will. In spite of
being very careful to avoid it, most of the Linux dolts have
seen me as defending SCO. That's so stupid that I can't say
any more about it without getting angry and spouting nasties
again.

I have never had much respect for the larger Linux community. They
have always seemed to me to be a bunch of yowling dogs, immature,
filled with religious fervor for their OS, and exhibiting all
the worst characteristics of a mob.

This DOS attack just confirms all of that.

--
tony@aplawrence.com Unix/Linux/Mac OS X resources: http://aplawrence.com
Get paid for writing about tech: http://aplawrence.com/publish.html