Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Linux Software

Mindcraft Posts Linux Hate Mail 442

drwiii wrote in to tell us that Mindcraft has posted a few choice responses by Linux zealots. Quite offensive- don't read it you're pure of heart. <SERMON> I get CC'd on this stuff a lot so I knoW that these are not only real, but they are only scratching the surface of the crap that lands in the INBOX of anyone on the Internet who breaths anything that isn't glowing about Linux. And I'm embarassed by it. Please remember that how you say something is often more important than what you say. But in messages like these, what you said was childish and offensive, and you make us all look like raving loonies. This doesn't hurt Microsoft or help advance Linux-- in fact it does quite the opposite. Please Please Please read the Linux Advocacy HOWTO. Bad advocacy killed OS/2, The Amiga, and still threatens the Mac- don't let this happen to Linux. </SERMON>
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Mindcraft Posts Linux Hate Mail

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward

    Rationality is far rarer than emotion.

    The masses... act like masses, with the sanest voices of reason being drowned out. It is far easier to hurl vitriol and bombast than it is to carefully craft a measured, thoughtful response; even more so, when such rational answers seemingly lose themselves in the Abyss as the recipients hold aloft the most burning messages as symbols for all, and wash their hands of the matter. This is especially true when the recipient has a particular interest in cultivating immaturity and spite, and bearing those missives as testament to the apparent idiocy of the whole.

    The capacity for anger is within us all. When messaging is so accessible, and the temple doors thrown open forever, the shouts may drown out the whispers -- for who gets more attention?

    Thank you for your time.

  • I don't know what's more juvenile. The people who wrote the hate-mail or the "professional" benchmarking organization who put a link to it on /Default.htm for potential customers to follow.
  • by Anonymous Coward
    yes..PC Mag did. Upside : Linux proven 33% faster than NT when serving to NT clients using Samba.
    Downside : Apache proved significantly slower than IIS when serving static content on web pages. They didnt test either the new kernel httpd implementation or a faster server than apache. Would have been interesting to see results for that.
  • by Anonymous Coward
    Yes, it's irresponsible for people to act like this, esp. about something they care about. I don't subscribe to their actions and certainly do not promote their actions as appropriate. As a member of the Linux community, I think it is easily said that we are sorry that this happens.

    But we all know that is something that is almost status quo here on the Internet; it happens, it's not only the Linux crowd, and while wrong, I certainly am not stupid enough to think the entire community is made up of zealots. I am not saying that since it is prevalent that it's okay, I'm saying it's expected.

    Rather, the fact that Mindcraft is posting these letters is showing me something about them. They know as well as anybody the price paid in the computer industry. It's a "cost", an issue, of publishing and dealing on the Internet.

    The fact that they not only cannot handle this, but with their well-known anti-Linux sentiments, this is indeed a return fire for them. We challange Mindcraft's integrity professionally and financially (you think anyone else is going to look at Mindcraft's results as impartial? No, they are going to say "Gee, it's Mindcraft, they can't run a test right"), so it's fighting back.

    What I'm interested in is the question: Did they handle this *entire* Linux outrage appropriately? No, they've returned fire to the linux programmers sent during the 2nd run of their benchmarks. Are they justified in their posting of these hostile emails? Maybe, because of the acrimoniousness and childishness of the email. But it shows that they professionally cannot hold their own on this issue. Publishing email, even hostile, aggressive email sent to you, at least to me, is a no no. In fact, it lends more credibility to the notion that they are striking out against the Linux community instead of waiting for their questioned credibility to be potentially validated at the 2nd, more fair(?) run.

    Mindcraft has neither given view or context of these emails. Meaning, they have not requested they these things stop. They simply posted them, trying to make a case of neutrality by not giving an opinion, but at the same time saying something by not giving their request or viewpoint. They know what they are doing. They know how it looks.

    I would have expected better from the Linux community. But I know that is difficult given the nature of *any* community, Internet or not. To Mindcraft, I expected them to act professionally, not via retribution. Like trying to get fair benchmarks, that is apparantly too much to ask for.
  • by Anonymous Coward
    Microsoft's deathgrip on preloads killed OS/2. Blaming it on the victims may be a popular pasttime in the tres duh press, presumably because so many there were/are fully vested in the Windows world, but it is completely wrong. Bad advocacy did not kill OS/2. Before it died, it was outselling Windows at retail. It would have outsold Windows on preloads, if it could have gotten itself preloaded. But it couldn't.

    That is how MS maintains its monopoly, by shutting out competition. That is a ceiling that is still in place, by the way, and one that Linux will be bumping up against soon.

    Joe Barr
    The Dweebspeak Primer
  • by Anonymous Coward

    This story talks about trying to avoid people
    having a negative impression of Linux users,
    but I think its already too late.

    The reality is, Slashdot users, by and large,
    are much too quick to bash anyone who criticizes Linux, constantly spread FUD and bash MS, and
    IMHO, display far less intelligence than
    they supposedly have.

    There is near constant noise on this site against other platforms, against anyone not technologically oriented (business men, sales people, marketing, management), constantly bashing of anyone who doesn't agree with the GPL, etc.

    Linux is just an operating system, it is not the second coming, it is not a way of life, and it's not going to change the world. As soon as realize that there is more to the world than operating systems and computers, you will be alot better off.
  • by Anonymous Coward
    I'm surprised that Mindcraft has posted electronic mail in what appears to me to be an obvious violation of the authors' copyrights (well, maybe I'm not that surprised). If it were my letters being plastered for all to see you can bet I'd contact my lawyer - an outfit like that ought to be able to pay a tidy sum...
  • by Anonymous Coward
    Use newsgroups instead. That way, we can determine the voracity of your statements instead of your memory.

    You describe a different picture than I've ever seen, I don't believe you.
  • by Anonymous Coward
    IMHO reposting a private email in a public forum without the prior permission of the writer is at least very.. very inethical.. and it's against the netiquete..
    Here, in Hungary, it is also illegal.
    Someone doing this could face some really hard time in the court..
    But even if it legal (probably is) it clerly describes how pathetic this Mindcraft atack against the Linux community is..
    They are attacking 10M+ people and their only proof is 10 flaming emails.
    I really don't think this hurts us.. Any IQ 70+ man clearly see throught... It hurts MS much more, if the readers beleive that there is a connection between MS and Mindcraft.. and most of the people beleive this.
  • by Anonymous Coward
    If anything is going to hurt Linux the most it is the *perceived* image of its users. The way so many of its users act on the net automatically establishes the connection of linux_user = immature, loud mouthed, offensive geek.

    Perhaps a good analogy is the low-rider phenomenon. When one sees a pimped out low rider with tiny wheel crusising down the street, one usually assume that the driver is a violent, machismoistic, minority, socially unacceptable gangbanger.

    Think about it, that stereotype is nearly universal and guarenteed that it will impossible to shake.

    Do we want Linux to be the "low rider" of the computing world?
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 22, 1999 @06:44AM (#1839064)
    Those hate mails are certainly immature and should not have been sent. However it is quite unprofessional for Mindcraft to post these, as if they are trying to insinuate that this is the norm in the Linux community. Most of us do not send things like this, but getting flamed by idiots is part of life on the Internet, and Mindcraft is going to have to learn to deal. Mindcraft, your constant raving about the hate mail you've received gets no sympathy from me at all. Please try to act professional.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 22, 1999 @07:58AM (#1839065)
    It seems the writers have little experience
    with the fact that e-mail, especially a
    strongly worded one, can just go off and
    start living a life of its own.

    This guy is right on the money with this statement. If you are going to send email to somebody with a traceable account (or post in usenet for that matter) don't say things you normally would not in public, or put in writing. The internet is a public forum, and many people don't realise this.

    I spoke to a person in human resources who told me about a conference that she went to. One of the talks was on hiring senior level people. In the talk it was suggested that if the position was one of serious importance that the candidate was being considered for, it might be a wise idea to do a internet and usenet search for possible webpages, discussions, postings, and emails the person may have written.

    Apparently they are already using this strategy in two other areas: for service companies looking to hire people to contract out, and for companies looking to hire contractors.

    Almost all states do not require the keeping of information that pertains to why people weren't hired. This screening pratice apparently does not violate any known laws because there is currently no legal preceedence in this case. Plus it can be dismissed as the employer did not hire the person based on their views, but rather their communications skills (e.g. instead of "I tend to disagree with your viewpoint" the candidate wrote "FUCK OFF WHORE SEMIN DEAMON").
  • by Crow- ( 35 )
    DO you think they would post any of the intelligent comebacks? no, they post only the ones that make people look stupid.
  • Linux crashed? Care to be a little more specific? The only "panic" or "oops" I've seen since 1.3 has been because of dying hardware... Following links to your page, it seems as if you're an active developer... as such you should know that just saying "it doesn't work" isn't good enough...

    In short: What was your system doing, how were you doing it, and what do you think the problem might be?

    These three things could help you keep your systems solid...

    As for cyrix... ;)
  • >I'm curious what percentage of Linux users are
    >raving loonies. 30%? 40%? What fires them up so
    >much? Perhaps they are mostly adolescent brutes?
    >In any case, all the hype about Linux I see in
    >SlanderLot.org is most likely no good for Linux.

    Are you for real? Hahahahahahahha... This is way too funny... Here we are, in the middle of a post about how worthless OS wars are, and how flames and name calling only degrades the users OS, and someone posts a message calling Linux users "raving loonies".

    I _really_ hope that this post was made in jest, although the cynic in me tells me that the poster couldn't see the irony in his post...

    _sigh_

    Computer users are pretty much representative of the population. We have our geeks and nerds, our business execs, our kiddies, our morons, our jerks, and our loud mouth bigots. These people can use whatever operating system them want... which means that _every_ OS has jerks and morons using it.. it also means that every OS has intelligent users.
  • Dear Sirs and Madams:

    I apologize for the unprofessional behavior of some Linux community members. I'm quite certain you realize that anytime you gather 5 or 10 million people together in something, there will be those who will be professional, and there will be those that due to a lapse in judgement write the things that you've posted to your linux net rage webpage. I hope you realize that while there was much anger due to many things regarding your tests, and I'm certain you can understand it whether or not you agree with it, and you're displaying the down side of constructive criticism of something that people care about.

    I'm quite certain that if I criticized anything on the internet, with or without facts to defend my position, I'd end up with a similar looking Inbox. It's a sad reality that the internet makes dissemination of information and opinions from anybody, to anybody, quick and easy. Sometimes it makes it so fast and easy, that there isn't sufficient thought involved. I'm not defending the actions of those who submitted those particular comments to you, but I hope you can understand that it isn't everyone.

    I hope you understand that while the majority of the Linux community has felt the benchmarks to be biased, unfair and generally irrelevant, that most of our leaders chose to write intelligent criticisms of the benchmark, just as you wrote a criticism of Linux with respect to NT, simply and professionally. Name-calling and the use of profanity is as unjustified as it is pointless. I'd like to apologize on behalf of the authors of the messages you are displaying and also on behalf of the authors of the inflammatory messages which surely you received but did not publicize.

    I sincerely hope that you'll reconsider your decision to publicize those particular examples of net.abuse. I think it's probably best for the reputations of the Mindcraft corporation and the Linux community, both, to not display what we all know is one of the saddest realities of the net.

    Sincerely,
    Kevin Way
  • Reading some umm... texts often makes me ashamed of being a human, yet an alternative of becoming a corpse still isn't bright enough for me to willingly switch to it. The same applies to operating systems.
  • I'm afraid I have to disagree. It is my understanding that emails, like any other form of correspondece, are copyrighted material even if the author does not explicetly include a copyright notice. You may not copy and/or distribute the email without the author's permission.

    In practice, this is not always done, but that's not the point.
  • Absolutely. It was shocking to see that remark to the effect that 'bad advocacy killed OS/2': you'd think Slashdot would be better informed about the Microsoft antitrust case.
    Anybody with a strong interest in seeing Microsoft continue to expand and destroy until there aren't any other choices at all, would of course be strongly in favor of blaming bad advocacy. It sounds sort of plausible, it allows a useful fiction that individual consumers control the industry and can make or break distribution channels merely by their whims, and it's a useful smokescreen to cover up the fact that a software trust has been putting the screws to everybody it can, for at least ten years. If you truly believe that bad advocacy killed OS/2, then it's a very easy step to conclude that the thing to do is practice only _good_ advocacy, and trust that niceness and reasonable dialogue will persuade manufacturers who are being presented with ultimatums of "enough with this Linux now that the trial's over, otherwise we will multiply your license fees by 10 times and lower your worst competitor's by 10 percent just to break you".
    If you really believe that good advocacy and civil polite discourse will persuade key distribution channels to permit the existence of Linux when faced with penalties of that scale, then please ask Tinkerbell to sprinkle some fairy dust on the linux kernel to make it faster, as you might as well believe in her too.
    We'll be lucky if they don't have open-source-derived software declared an obscenity to be blocked from network transmission, if we seriously go around acting like good advocacy will be enough. We are at war. Of course Mindcraft lied. They're at war too- just on the other side. If they _did_ allow us to pay them to slant the other way, they'd never see work from MS or any commercial vendor again. They have to pick their side and stay with it, and they will- it's too late to stop now.
    Foul language and brutal accusations of treachery are not _unwarranted_, they are just totally _unhelpful_. Often such outbursts aren't worth the temporary feelings of relief and self-righteousness they bring. Get used to the idea of not doing this: it's not because such attacks are _unfair_, no! The point is, this is too serious for mucking around like that! It's no joke. _Legislation_ is being railroaded through every which way to support the Microsoft trust in particular, and to render proprietary software free of any responsibility in general. If the government antitrust case doesn't end in radical adjustments, then what? I'll tell you what: cursing and reviling people is going to seem damned inadequate at that point. It won't help anymore, when your ISP goes under/is bought out/develops its IT committment to standardize fully on MS/IP or whatever might be waiting out there- it is not unthinkable that the world's communication infrastructure could end up collectively owned by various trusts with no tolerance anymore for anything but the technological mainstream. Linux will not be _outlawed_, necessarily- but you'll have to call up BBSes again, because the Net will be off limits- and reverse engineering the protocols will mean jail time, and getting caught communicating will prove guilt. There are situations where you would be _assigned_ a computer just in order to pay taxes and be a citizen- given enough economizing and reduction of cost and given continued emphasis on standardisation, the 'citizen's PC' is not unthinkable. You'd better believe tampering with it would be against the law.
    Welcome to '2004'. This screed has been in the true spirit of Orwell's '1984': a desperate attempt to paint things _so_ black that reality could not rival it. If you think it's incomprehensibly outrageous, consider this: if I'd made it less vitriolic, reality would have already outstripped it. We're living amid the first virtual war, and few people can comprehend it as yet: by the time the regular person finds that their existence is centrally monitored and entirely regulated through a private company in Redmond, by the time that company, having nothing left to conquer, moves in on government itself (who saw the report on the Microsoft 'game' in New York, of hunting terrorists? WHY are Microsofties _training_ as _cops_? All in good fun, never mind all that equipment...) then it will be too late for anything but _physical_ war. And that should not have to happen...
    Me, I don't write to people like Mindcraft. I wouldn't know what to say to them. They don't know their danger. People don't understand the nature of power- the instant it regroups and begins building under a new guise, it's the fable of the Blind Men and the Elephant again- it's a treetrunk! it's a snake! it's a wall!
    It is power. Raw power on a scale beyond all third-world countries and beginning to be beyond some of the big-leaguers. And because they're not training troops (and _why_ were Microsoft managers 'hunting terrorists' with thousands of dollars' worth of technical support in New York City? Are they really satisfied with being a shoddy merchant anymore? WHY are they rehearsing such cop-games, what's putting it in their heads to recreate in such a manner?), people want to behave like they're the same entity that was running around in Bellevue, Washington, coding 'Typing Tutor'.
    People who flip out at stuff like the Mindcraft reports are only reacting instinctively to something they don't properly understand- a quiet but pervasive shifting of power all over the world. Information is power. Control of information is serious power. It's rather childish to behave like old men sitting around in judge's robes and senators' suits are still the top of the totem pole, still the authority figure. They are not what they used to be- they don't move fast enough- sooner or later, they've got to go.
    This doesn't have to be the future, but placing a trusting childlike faith in the power of the individual and the charm of civilized advocacy is not a helpful move. We're at war: maybe a new kind of war, but a war. We already know many of the terms- Microsoft, for one, has leaked some of their plans (such as the subversion of common standards, something which would have been noticed anyway). I'm only saying that it would be out of character for them to stop there, or to think small.
    Anybody wishing to believe that Microsoft (or anyone in their singular position) shows respect for limits, or thinks small and humble, may go on doing so all they wish, but are implored to not weary wiser people with their inexplicable beliefs.
  • No no no....

    Mindcraft: "Sir, you've attacked my integrity"
    The World: "Yes."
  • Exactly. No matter how much CmdrTaco begs and screams, flames will not stop. I run some little fan website for a music group, and even I get flames along the lines of "your sight sux d00d, u need to use fraimes."
  • Basically if you want the general public to read your message you have to post something worth reading.

    No, you just have to post something that the moderators think is worth reading.
  • One: They are still trying to repair their damaged reputation at the expense of the community. (In my opinion, they should publish an objective and unbiased report next time.)

    Two: There are a few zealots out there! If someone insulted your mother or girlfriend like Mindcraft insulted Linux (by not even consulting members of the community the way they consulted Microsoft on the test) you would get mad too! Possibly even pounding the living daylights out of the offender!

    Maybe... we should resort to carefully researched and worded FUD like Microsoft is doing? Or, should we speak our honest minds? We SHOULD practice diplomacy and prove our mettle - yes. But, these reposted emails do underscore the powerful objections that many in the community felt when the Mindcraft findings were posted.

    I would have to say that instead of posting hate mail from a few choice individuals, in an attempt to discredit the whole Linux community (and probably at the behest of Microsoft for propoganda purposes), Mindcraft should apologise for not properly consulting the community on the tests and ultimately gain our respect and support.

    After all, we are the generation of technicians and programmers they may hope to do business with in the future.
  • Posted by _DogShu_:

    It seems to me that Mindcraft posting the rantings of 10 people is just childish as the people who originally sent them the messages.
    I realize they probably got 1000 more just like them, but that isn't even .01% of the linux community, and Mindcraft is just trying to characterize the entire linux community as a bunch of 13 year olds who should wash their mouths out.
    The only difference is they are "talking shit" in a public forum, and trying to characterize all Linux users in this forum, and characterizing these users to the whole world. The difference is they are "talking shit" behind our backs.
  • Posted by generic kewl tech reference:

    Some time ago, when the online service Prodigy was trendy, I was one of the moderators of some of the Advanced Dungeons and Dragons groups. I bring this up because occasionally one of those concerned, well-meaning folks who think all role playing games are the work of Satan would post a message to that effect, collect the one or two hundred "Die you fskng Nazi! Choatic Evil ROOOOLLLLLZZZ!!!" responses, then post them on the religious boards as evidence that role-playing games are the work of Satan.

    Whether the tests were fair, and in fact the relative worth of NT vs. Linux is irrelevant for the purposes of this discussion. The point, as many people have pointed out, is that people will say stupid, childish things. There is no way to stop them, and people who disagree will use said stupid, childish things to their advantage.

    Now that I'm through pointing out the obvious, what about starting a "You think THAT'S bad, look at what we get" page? Well, there is the point that it would be stooping to the same level. Is that a bad thing? Perhaps if you posted a website of the hate email, and invited people to contribute the trash that they get on any subject. Impartially mocking all these lamers may do a better job of discrediting them than letting this devolve into yet another OS religious jihad.


  • Posted by Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters:

    Subject: "Net Rage" as spin control
    Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 13:51:33 -0400
    From: David Mertz
    Reply-To: mertz@gnosis.cx
    To: sales@mindcraft.com, info@mindcraft.com

    It really is disappointing how craven Mindcraft has been in its own
    defense. I followed some of the press about Mindcraft's initial rather
    biased "benchmark" of WinNT and Linux, including the various retests and
    the like. "Lies, Damn Lies, and Benchmarks" -- as they say.

    At a minimum, it seems clear to any dispassioned observer that Mindcraft
    took money from Microsoft for the purpose of producing results that case
    Microsoft in a good light. Lots of selection bias went into choosing a
    test environement; and lots of sneaky tuning (or de-tuning) was done on
    compared machines to produce the desired results. Further, Mindcraft
    was not very upfront about what was going on, especially initially. It
    looks a lot like the kind of polls that politicians and political
    interest groups use to "prove" their desired conclusions.

    All that said, I never actually bothered to do anything besides read
    about the ongoing "benchmarks", and maybe mention the issue to a few
    acquaintances. But then I happened to encounter the newest agit-prop,
    which seems far more deceptive even than all the initial tests were.
    Essentially, Mindcraft now seems intent on slandering the Linux
    community (of which I am not really a member, beyond very peripherally,
    as it happens).

    By posting a prominent link on its home page titled "Net Rage",
    Mindcraft is essentially trying to mischaracterize the whole community
    of Linux users/developers by implicitly claiming they are all ill-spoken
    spewers of explitives, and cannot think or argue clearly. I also think
    you have probably directly misappropriated the letters of those folks
    you posted. It is hardly clear that an email grants publication
    permission.

    In any event, I am quite certain that you received many thousands of
    polite, curteous rebuts to your published benchmarks. Many of these
    almost certainly contained detailed and well-thought technical
    critiques. Rather than make any of those available, you have picked
    though the whole batch to find the half-dozen respondents who got
    carried away and swore. This is extremely dishonest; and is insulting
    to reasoned discourse.

    I also believe that the newest propoganda, like the intitial benchmarks,
    are going to come back to bite Mindcraft. Deception is a lot harder to
    maintain than honesty... and yet again, this will not be hard for most
    people to discern.

    Yours, Lulu...
  • it would also let them see just how stable their boxes are under the /. effect.


    Who am I?
    Why am here?
    Where is the chocolate?
  • This was an example of the kind of childish flamebait that we have come to expect from these folks. No I'm not talking about the zealot e-mails. I am talking about Mindcraft only publishing a tiny fraction of the mail they received and trying to give the impression that this is indicative of the whole. There were a large number of reasoned, level headed people who mailed them with detailed reasons for their disagreement with Mindcraft. We see no representation of them.

    At first I was willing to give them the benefit of the doubt and assume that Mindcraft were being honest and gave it a real try. I was assuming that there was some honest reason that their test disagreed with every bit of anecdotal evidence out there.

    But this latest tactic of theirs proves me wrong. They *are* biased shills and this proves it. You don't take a community as large as the linux community and act like 12 e-mail messages represents the whole. That's bigoted bullshit on their part.

  • People have been comparing Linux advocacy to Mac, Amiga, and OS/2 advocacy and claiming that Linux will suffer the same fate due to the similarities. This comparasin is invalid for the following reasons:
    • Mac, Amiga, and OS/2 were owned and produced by companies - companies that have to have a large enough market or else they drop the product. Linux is not in the same boat. Its existence is not at the whim of this company or that.
    • Mac, Amiga, and OS/2 were/are things that were more popular before, and the flames started when their popularity fell. That made for the 'sore loser' image of advocates. Linux started out not popular and the flames started when the popularity increased. This is a totally different pattern.
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • These responses, while regrettable, were entirely predictable. Mindcraft is putting them on display as a brush with which to tar *all* criticism they've received, and to draw attention away from their own clearly biased methodology.

    They told at least one direct lie in that report. It's important we keep the real villans in perspective, since I'm sure all villans receive immature flames as well as well reasoned criticisms and it should never be a reason to dismiss the points of their better critics or to let them off the hook.
    --
    Employ me! Unix,Linux,crypto/security,Perl,C/C++,distance work. Edinburgh UK.

  • Reading stuff like this makes me ashamed to be a Linux user... Well, not exactely ashamed to be using it, but ashamed to be compared to mindles idiots who use Linux.

  • Isn't Star Office or Word Perfect roughly equivalent to Word? I don't understand what the heck she's trying to say there. Heck, StarOffice is practically an MS Office clone.

    The fact that some Linux users flame is a pretty stupid reason to use or not use Linux itself.

    Probably not that many FreeBSD users flame (a couple here on Slashdot do, though). But there are a lot less FreeBSD users than Linux users, so that is to be expected.

    I've been flamed by Windows users plenty of times. Doesn't bother me. I base my opinion of Windows on the performance/reliability (or lack thereof) of the operating system itself, not its users or advocates.

    --

  • I think the beheaviour of these Linux Zealots is quite childish, on the other hand: why publish this? What if we would publish all the BS that was posted on slashdot by Microsoft fanatics? I think it's equally childish to publish the abuse.
  • MindCraft and anyone else that gets mail like this should make it public.
    The fact is that the linux community has allways been like this. Even guys that have used Linux longer then me. ( 4 years ).
    I guess that people can't figure out that this type of behavior is not acceptable on the net. If mindcraft wanted to all they would have to do is send e-mail of that type to the isp's it came from and those accounts would be shut off. These e-mails are coming from the same type people that make fun of Windows only users. Maybe they don't get it. We have to be nice. We have to tell truths. Not throw mud. If you can't speak as a authority on something you have no bussiness addressing issues like mindcraft.

    E-mails like this make me sad... I remeber the OS/2 wars. People thought that OS/2 programmers were a bunch of flaks after reading comments like this... So now the same mentality is at work to bring down linux too.

    Didn't your mom tell you if you can't say anything nice then keep your mouth shut? She told you that so that people would not thing she raised a idiot.
  • MindCraft and anyone else that gets mail like this should make it public.
    The fact is that the linux community has allways been like this. Even guys that have used Linux longer then me. ( 4 years ).
    I guess that people can't figure out that this type of behavior is not acceptable on the net. If mindcraft wanted to all they would have to do is send e-mail of that type to the isp's it came from and those accounts would be shut off. These e-mails are coming from the same type people that make fun of Windows only users. Maybe they don't get it. We have to be nice. We have to tell truths. Not throw mud. If you can't speak as a authority on something you have no bussiness addressing issues like mindcraft.

    E-mails like this make me sad... I remeber the OS/2 wars. People thought that OS/2 programmers were a bunch of flaks after reading comments like this... So now the same mentality is at work to bring down linux too.

    Didn't your mom tell you if you can't say anything nice then keep your mouth shut? She told you that so that people would not think she raised a idiot.
  • I tired to take a look but apparently my browser is evil and wishes harm to a bunch of other equally shoddy software products.

    Sad that someone would destroy the platform / browser independent potential of a web site by rejecting certain browsers.

    But hey, probably cuts down on the flames when you only let people who already think like you into your website...
  • Sorry 'bout that...stupid enter key. Anyway, fwiw, my take on all this is that Mindcarft got caught, called on the carpet publicly, and really didn't do too much to dispel the over-all idea that they were just an MS shill. They also must have been living under a rock, in a cave, on an island with no 'net access NOT to know that publishing an MS-paid for report now, just when Linux is hitting the trade rags big time was going to piss a lot of people off real quick - I'm sure they were aware of the Holloween docs and the Linux community's response to them.

    So, to publish a, to put it mildly, controversial report dissing Linux in favor of NT, they must have been the most naive group of people on the planet - or in the computer biz - to be surprised that the Mindcraft inbox would be full of less-than complimentary emails. I'm not saying that the flamage was justified, nor am I sure that Mindcraft is acting maturely in posting it. But they had to be aware that they were asking for trouble from the get-go. I do think pouting in public and selectively posting the emails of loons shows a distinct lack of class.
  • You're overlooking the fact that just about every community has loonies like these. Post something positive about Linux and you'll get a bunch of MS loonies flaming you. It isn't representative of the community as a whole though. They conveniently ignored this and posted the childish responses in an effort to sway people's opinion in their favor for having to deal with a bunch of kooks like the Linux community. I think they are trying to divert attention from the real issues, and they chose a very unprofessional way of doing it. It says a lot about their company.

  • I think you assume too much. I don't think that the majority of responses they got were like this. They posted what... 5 or 6 emails? If that was the worst they got, and we can safely assume that this provoked quite a few responses, then they are being manipulative by only posting a few bad emails as being representative of the replies from the Linux community. This is highly misleading, since I know that I and many others sent in rational replies to their tests. These, of course, were never posted. If they aren't going to post the good as well as the bad, then they are being misleading, plain and simple.

  • Not sure how Linux is more accessible to such people. I would think it would be the other way around. I don't entirely buy the whole 10 to 1 ratio either. One unscientific test does nothing to prove anything either way. I think there are just a lot of nuts out there. They hitch their wagon to whatever strikes them as being cool. Windows isn't cool to many of these people, so they flame anyone who seems favorable toward it rather than Linux, which is obviously cool. ;) I don't think you can fault the Linux community in general for the actions of a small, but vocal minority who most likely have nothing to do with the OS itself, other than the fact that they may screw around with it because they think it's cool.

  • I will agree with you on the account of Mindcraft being referred to as a 'whore' in some of the e-mails which they posted - I guess that's as accurate a word as you can get.

    OTOH, some of the language is pushing it. I understand the sentiment of many of the e-mails, however, I can certainly understand the thought that obscene words can be overused. When it's every fourth or fifth word, it's getting a bit overdone. They (the e-mailers) should try to clean it up some, at least. However, others' points that Usenet often picks up much nastier flames... well, I can't disagree with that, either.

    The Linux community does need to persuade those few who would try to use swearing to prove a point to use it a little differently. I can see swearing... but there's a point where it's just too much.
  • Let's think about this for a second. Would they really do that? Would they REALLY snap up just the e-mails that suit their purpose? (i.e., painting all Linux users as flaming loudmouthed morons?) I think we know the answer to this.
  • Yes, boys and girls, it's there.

    This issue came up recently on the linux kernel mailing list. And many of the same arguments that are being used here to try and limit the flamming were used there as well- and my opinion remains the same.

    Anyone who is looking for an excuse not to use linux, or to advise other people not to use linux, will find one. It doesn't matter if Pope John Paul the Second nominates Linus Torvalds for Sainthood- the decision has already been made. The accusations don't even have to be true- look at Bob Metcalf's recent article.

    Anyone who looks at the issue honestly won't be swayed (either way) by flamming, or by profanity in the kernel (are you _sure_ there's no profanity in the source of NT?).
  • >Those emails certainly are an embarrassment to the Linux >community,but what is Mindcraft trying to prove by posting them >prominently? What does that crap have to do with Mindcraft's stated >mission:software, system and network testing?

    Simple. This is part of the Microsoft PR response to the NT server bug fix fiasco. If you can paint everybody who says anything bad about Microsoft or it's allies as a Microsoft or Mindcraft hater you can try to negate the impact of it. Won't work, because nobody trusts anything Microsoft or it's defenders has to say anymore, but they have to make the effort....
  • Without Windows, novice end users could/would merely use the GUI systems that all predated Windows.

    The world does not need Microsoft. Even the grannies can get along without M$.

    With no IRQs or exploding registries or phantom PnP devices, they would likely be better off.
  • What makes you think the people who use terms like 'Micro$haft' are geeks? They're clearly not geeks because they're spending far too much time acting immaturely and writing foul mouthed email and not nearly enough time writing good quality code.

    Linux attracts a broad spectrum of users, but I strongly suspect that the geek population of Linux is a lot lower than many people think. Forums like Slashdot which try and promote Linux as a "geek" culture don't help matters one whit. It's a case of geek implies Linux, not Linux implies geek.

    In fact, I'd also be willing to bet that the vast majority of true contributors to Linux are of a reasonble age (30+) and have responsibilities of a family or job. These people often have the skills and acquired wisdom necessary to write truly great code, something that younger coders often don't have (even if they think they do). I would expect a few rare exceptions, but there always are.

    Which means that the vast majority of Linux users are non-contributors. They are either teenagers or in their early 20s. They don't have any real kinds of responsibility. They may have reasonable skills but lack the wisdom and experience to apply it.

    Is it any wonder that given these people as the majority of "advocates" then all Linux users come across in general as childish immature imbecilic dolts? That is the current opinion regarding Linux users amongst computer professionals I know, and opinions like this are not formed lightly.
  • He didn't call people who use M$ geeks. He called them warez puppies.

    Keep reading past that point. He is replying to someone who has used an M$ variant, and then goes on to say...

    It's one thing when we see the term once, but you look like a god damned warez puppy when you use them over and over. Not an ounce of logical thought shows through ... and isn't that what geeks prize? Aren't geeks always bashing people who don't use their brains?

    This reads quite clearly that a geek should know better, a geek shouldn't exhibit "not an ounce of logical thought", and geeks should "use their brains", and from the grammar you can see that the geek in this case is in the first person, ie the person he's talking to. It's obvious that he's telling the previous person that if they want to be a geek they should stop using terms like M$, because it is very ungeeklike to attack in non-technical or non-logical ways.

    You're misunderstanding the term geek. It has a positive connotation in these circles.

    And you're misunderstanding me: I'm well aware that geek is a positive term.

    And being 30+ or having families has nothing to do with anything.

    Well, as I said, it is my belief that being 30+ does have something to do with it. That was my assertion, the point of my post, the thrust of my argument. The greatest contributors to Linux are for the most part older, wiser, and often have a family to look after. My belief is that proper geekdom goes hand in hand with age, because with age often goes increased responsibility not only for yourself but also for others. It is by having this responsibility that you act in proper geeky ways: being rational, calm, collected, arguing in logical and technical ways rather than flaming or insulting.

    I don't know how you go from drawing conclusions about the vast majority of /.ers based on emails to mindcraft sent by some morons.

    I didn't base my assertion on this, and I don't see where you got the impression that I did. In fact I made no conclusions, only an assertion.

    I don't see any logic in any of your assertions. :)

    I only made one assertion, and it's pretty clear that you didn't understand it. Also you didn't argue against my assertion, instead you just presented your own differing assertion. I presented a reason for my assertion, whereas you just made some incorrect claims about what I think and therefore concluded that I was wrong.

    I'm sorry, I think you're one of the geek wannabes I was talking about.

  • by heroine ( 1220 ) on Tuesday June 22, 1999 @06:51AM (#1839106) Homepage
    I always wondered why I got instantly moderated to -1 whenever I said something negative about Linux. So far today /dev/hda has thrashed solid for 3 hours and Linux has crashed twice, with the only consolation from Linux users being "Cyrix sucks. Get a real chip."
  • Whether Microsoft had anything to do with the posting of these flames or not, it is something that they would have done good for themselves to have done. Truly, our response to the whole Mindcraft issue is of the nature of herding cats, exactly as Dave Taylor said in a recent interview.

    Through our lack of unity, they managed to use our own words against us. Attacking a process, from it's weakest point. Just like the halloween document said.

    Kind of ironic, considering the Halloween document was used against Microsoft in many quotes from people.

    Oh well, popularity of my OS aside, back to coding for fun...
  • It's on operating system. Most of the people who write flames like that most likely had nothing to do with writing it. Why should they care so much?

    Because they identify with it. Someone says it's bad, it means they are bad for using it. It's a theory anyway.

    So here we have someone, probably not too stable to begin with, taking anything someone says about their OS as a personal insult, in a society where the only emotion men are allowed (even encouraged) to have is rage, and anyone is surprised they write flaming incoherent frothage? I'm surprised they haven't resorted to guns & bombs!

    So, kids, next time you feel that ol' demon anger creeping up, repeat after me: "I am not my OS, I am not my OS, I am not my OS."

  • like this one. This article has absolutely nothing to do with the Mindcraft emails and does not belong in this forum. The answer to your question is that a bunch of Slashdot readers like you are moderating Slashdot and in my opinion they usually do a good job. I would be disappointed to see comments moderated down because they are anti-Linux, but it is usually only those which don't relate to the topic that are moderated down. For instance if you look at this article, all the posts (except yours) which meet a threshold of 3 (my comment threshold) pertain directly to the emails posted by Mindcraft. Some of them are about their disappointment with the people who posted the mails, some about their disappointment with Mindcraft for posting them, and at least one is downright accusative of Linux users for giving in easily to flamebait. But regardless of their slant they all have to do with the article, yours does not.

    If you want help with a linux problem you should problem try reading comp.os.linux.questions or a newsgroup or mailing list related to your problem, and posting if your question goes unanswered. Not only will people probably be more receptive to your question, you're a bit more likely to find people knowledgable of your particular problem than on a news item about emails posted concerning rigged benchmarks.

  • Whenever I'm tempted to write something as brainless, and offensive as these posts (which I am on occasion), I get the following vision:

    [shot fades to several decades in the future]

    Old man bouncing an eight year old on their knee. Eight year old looks up and says:

    ``Wow, these RayBan web glasses are ace Grandpa, I'm going to look your name up on deja.com.''

    Pause.

    ``What does ........ mean ?''

    Oh dear, how embarrassing.

    Remember, your email's are likely to come back to haunt you, so consider carefully how you express yourself.
  • Perhaps rather more interesting than these silly emails is Mindcraft's rebuttals [mindcraft.com] to the reporting they received after the 1st "benchmark" tests.

    Personally I'd be interested to see some rebuttals to these rebuttals ...

    Regards, Ralph.

  • this is nothing new to OS/2 users. some zealots get nasty and sure enough the press reports every ugly sentence and portrays the users of grassroots movement X as a bunch of jerks.

    Joe Barr I see is listed repeatedly. What a suprise. Joe was just as much (if not more) mean and nasty in "support" of OS/2.

    Get used to it. It's gonna get worse. The net and deadtree rags will pick this up and ram it hard. History repeats itself.

    Asking everyone to stop ranting nastily is not gonna do a lick of good. Regardless of whether .001% of linux users (or trolls) or 10% rant like the examples, the perception will be put forth that this is standard linux user behavior.

    team OS/2 was essentially slandered into oblivion by this process. looks like the crosshairs are now fixed on a new target.

    To Linux' advantage, the like of Nick Petreley are at the forefront of influential rags like Infoworld, he can help give persepective on this. in the dark days of OS/2, we had Stewart Alsop in Nicks place, shamelessly furthuring the FUD and encouraging the false perceptions.

    just my $.02
  • That's great that you are not having problems. With 160MB of memory in your box, I sure hope you are not having problems with the disk swapping out.

    Since you brought it up, I can tell you about my old IBM PS/2 486dx20 with 16MB running Linux and X. Its SUSE distro seems slightly slower running netscape, but it is most usable, except for compiling code on large projects. For the CPU intensive stuff, I just offload it over the net to my 464MHz Redhat Celery. You can always run Linux on old and limited hardware.

    I'm not too sure what would be causing disk thrashing for the original poster, but it would be a challenge to find out.
  • by dattaway ( 3088 ) on Tuesday June 22, 1999 @07:06AM (#1839136) Homepage Journal
    You can always ask for help and there are great places for doing so. Complaining may be less useful for reading and may annoy. Asking for help is always much more constructive.

    Last time I checked the newsgroups relating to questions, over 50% were answered in hours. I read the newsgroups, because they describe methods to solve problems in ways that I have not yet thought of. I haven't tried IRC, but I hear you can get instant help.

    I am always happy to help when someone from slashdot or anywhere else asks for help. Asking for help is a good way to meet people.
  • Zealotry didn't kill the Amiga, Commodore refusing to market the Amiga killed the Amiga. Yes, it put a lot more of the focus on the users, such that THEIR zealotry - since they were the only ones actively trying to promote the platform (while Commodore execs were ignoring and someties actually BADMOUTHING the platform!) - took home a lot more of the spotlight. But the real problem was that Commodore couldn't have marketed a cure for death, and nothing the users did differently would have changed that.

    That said, I'm sickened by the nasty reputation the Amiga user base has gained over the years (which continues in some circles to this day), and am disturbed to see the Linux base repeating the Amiga community's mistakes. Most bothersome is seeing Linux users shoot down Amiga users in exactly the way Amiga users used to shoot down other platforms - as though there were no parallel.

    However you'll notice, although there ARE a lot of Windows bigots out there, it hasn't hurt that platform - mostly because it has enough "real" marketing to cover for it.
  • I sent a note encouraging them to respect the privacy of those who send them e-mails and visit their website. Here is a transcript of the message.

    From: P.J. Hinton
    To: administrator@www.mindcraft.com
    Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 13:49:00 -0500 (CDT)
    Subject: privacy issues with your website
    Organization: "Wolfram Research, Inc."
    Message-ID:

    I reviewed the transcripts of hateful e-mail messages sent to your sales mail alias regarding this webpage:

    http://www.mindcraft.com/linux-net-rage.html

    Regardless of the merits of the authors' arguments, I find it to be a deplorable violation of privacy on behalf of your website to post complete transcripts of mailings without first having received (or at least indicating a that you have received) permission from the authors.

    I would think that as a corporation that derives a major portion of its sustinence from the world wide web that you would be aware of what is accepted as ethical use of user-submitted data and content. Your website does not have any perceivable privacy statement on its home page or immediate links thereon. There is no listing for you at truste.org, either.

    I would encourage you to rethink your decision to publish unsolicited e-mails such as this and to articulate to the public a policy that respects the privacy of your website visitors -- be they friendly or hostile.

    --
    P.J. Hinton
    Mathematica Programming Group paulh@wolfram.com
    Wolfram Research, Inc.
    Disclaimer: Opinions expressed herein are those of the author alone.
  • This is going to start a riot, but I don't actually think that posting email is necessarily a bad thing. Sure it's rude, but the people who had their emails posted really haven't earned Mindcraft's politeness. What this should do is reflect very poorly on the people whose emails were posted. Naturally, that's not what will happen, but it would be just. It's like if someone whispered "you're a jerk" in my ear, and then I told everyone I met that this person thought I was a jerk. What's wrong with that?

    That's not to say that I find Mindcraft's posting of only the choicest emails in good taste. I think that they should have made it clear that those emails reflected only the worst of an often good lot, and posted the good with the bad... and this only because of the association that people will make with Linux. But being called a whore that many times isn't likely to make you respect the people who call you a whore, whether or not you are one.

    It takes guts to publish bad things that people say about you. It can be a first step in addressing their complaints. Time will tell.
  • by BELG ( 4429 )
    Its tough when an operating system, in this case Linux, is judged by all the outsiders (and in some cases ourselves aswell) by the actions of the users.

    What can be done to prevent it? Nothing I guess.. Linus himself isnt Linux, RedHat isnt Linux. The users are in themselves, Linux. And when the users behave badly, the Linux community behaves badly. Therefore, Linux is bad. To the wintel-world that is.
  • by mcb ( 5109 ) on Tuesday June 22, 1999 @06:50AM (#1839155) Homepage
    Even though those letters make linux users look bad, my lasting impression after reading it (and seeing the link from the main page) is the immaturity and lack of responsibility of mindcraft to display letters by people who actually wrote something worthwhile.

    In any crowd you can find losers, especially considering the thousands that must've written in. I'm sure there were a number of "YeAh bizn1tch, NT ruLeZ, YOu RoCk." letters as well.

    Others might not think so, but I think it makes mindcraft look worse to publish these letters. They're once again trying to undermine linux by making the users look like losers.
  • Personally, I would far rather have this situation than not being able to respond at all. The emails were vulgar. However, they were NOT innaccurate. Mindcraft's test was outrageous. What do they deserve? Politenness? They already knew they were wrong. What good does it do to point that out to them? A waste of time.

    I think it's fine that they were flamed, but a little less vulgarity, perhaps. If those were the worst posts they had, I actually think they got off pretty easy.

    Companies are just going to have to deal with this. When they put up total bullshit they will be called on it. The era of one way top down communications is over.

  • It is my belief that MindCraft's integrity is more questionable now, then ever. Why would a company who claims to be impartial to a specific OS platform, take such useless rabble and post it to the public. You cannot honestly tell me that Pro-Microsoft individuals didn't send email to the effect of "GO MindCraft LINUX SUCKS!". I know they did. A friend of mine loves NT and sent one. So why didn't they post that. They are obviously partial to a specific platform and a specific software makers OS, and this is just more proof. Rob.
  • Yes, I'm one of the dingbats that sent Mindcraft one of the posted mail messages (A Centofanti if you're wondering).

    Was it a stupid, mindless mail message: sure! Would I do it again: Probably.


    I realize that it wasn't the most constructive bit of mail they got on the subject, but it summed up what I was feeling at the time. In response to to an earlier post: Yes, this is something I would say to the CEO of Mindcraft. The choice of words may be a little on the blue side, but I still feel that either they were honestly trying to tune Linux to perform at its best and they were incompentant at it, or they were shilling for MS by tilting the results (which is what I suspect). Mindcraft posting only these e-mails doesn't do much to sway my opinion on this matter.

    Just my 2 cents worth (and prob. 2 cents too many)

    A Centofanti
  • by Signal 11 ( 7608 ) on Tuesday June 22, 1999 @08:16AM (#1839174)
    I'm not sure which is more childish - publishing the rantings of 8 year olds, or the rants themselves.

    Really - who are they convincing here? I don't think many adults will be swayed by reading this - it's obvious the people who sent this material were not the brightest bulbs on the tree. Advocates of linux should just ignore mindcraft. They shot themselves in the foot, and now they're just trying to be vengeful and childish.



    --
  • Why? I think the phrase "don't descend to their level" is quite pertinent here.

    Negative advocacy didn't alone kill OS/2. Lukewarm support from IBM, sole proprietor of OS/2 killed it .. the contentiousness didn't help mind you.
  • by scrytch ( 9198 ) <chuck@myrealbox.com> on Tuesday June 22, 1999 @07:22AM (#1839188)
    Do you have any notion, any concept of how stupid you look when you use terms like M$, MicroShaft, MicroSuck, Mickeysoft, Bill Gate$ and so on? It's one thing when we see the term once, but you look like a god damned warez puppy when you use them over and over. Not an ounce of logical thought shows through ... and isn't that what geeks prize? Aren't geeks always bashing people who don't use their brains?

    Really, the only one I've seen lately that was at all clever was "Micros~1" (shouldn't it be MICROS~1.OFT?) Even that one will get old when it gets beat into the ground, then some more, and again, and some more, and beaten again, and then some more for whatever passes for good measure.

    It's amazing how many people's minds you can actually CHANGE when you sound like you treat business problems and solutions a little more seriously than a Quake deathmatch.
  • It's interesting to note that amongst most of the UK's technology journalists such discordant voices are referred to as "the Taliban", and are said to "give Team OS/2 a good name". Whilst we can ignore these things as one of a few bad things about a normally enjoyable task, the publicity that such attacks engenders in the US seems to have carried across the Atlantic.

    One of the most important things about good advocacy is that it's gentle persuasion, not hitting people over the head with insults and flames.

    How am I, as a writer and a consultant, able to get the good things about Linux and Open Source across to my readers and clients, if the public face that they see linked to those products and tools is a screaming abusive child?

    Most of us in this industry are adults who are able to make reasoned judgements about the tools and technologies that are right for a job. Quite often that may mean using or working with Microsoft or Sun. Unreasonable Open Source tantrums won't change that.

    S.
  • ``the people at Mindcraft are just about as childish as the people who sent those emails''

    IMHO, I'm not sure I'd label them childish. Based on

    1. the ``success'' that Mindcraft had in obtaining help from the internet community following their rather naive attempts (again, IMHO) prior to the first benchmark and
    2. Their reaction to a mailbox full of flaming e-mails.

    I would say that Mindcraft doesn't understand the how an internet community sometimes reacts to controversial issues. I doubt that they've spent any time in any Usenet newsgroups otherwise they wouldn't be so thin-skinned.

    OTOH, for the Linux community to mail bomb somebody like old Bruce is pretty out of line though. After reading in a recent Salon article how he was reacting to anyone that he felt was slighting his reputation (``You are challenging my integrity.'') it's obvious that he has absolutely little to no tolerance for anybody that disagrees with him. If people continue to e-mail him flames he'll continue to react in the self-righteous, pompous way he did... he'll post the e-mails to show how superior he is.

    BTW, Don't bother to flame me on my opinion. I've been flamed by Carl Lydick in comp.os.vms and once you've been flamed by the best...

  • by FreeUser ( 11483 ) on Tuesday June 22, 1999 @07:41AM (#1839199)
    Posting private emails in a public forum without the author's expressed permission is one of the more heinous violations of accepted netiquette anoyone can engage in. Whether it be USENET or a personal (or in this case corporate) webpage, it is clear that Mindcraft not only lacks the integrity to do a reasonable and well balanced benchmark comparison, they also lack the integrity to refrain from violating people's privacy by holding up private correspondence to public ridicule.

    Do I approve of the flames these messages contain? No. Such immature flamage only hurts the image of Linux to those less clueful. Nevertheless, Mindcraft's abuse of the net in publishing the emails in question are far and away worse than anything anyone wrote them could have been. Perhaps someone should point Mindcraft towards a FAQ or two on proper behavior and netiquette.
  • by Bad Mojo ( 12210 ) on Tuesday June 22, 1999 @06:51AM (#1839203)
    I run a web page and even I get e-mail like that. And I don't even do anything offensive. I get e-mail telling me I suck, or that I'll go to hell. Blah blah blah. So who's to say that mindcraft isn't just posting their choice of e-mail to make it appear that Linux users hate them? I'm sure I could prove that people over 70 hate me by publishing just those hate mails about my disrespect for adults or something. Geesh.

    If anything bothers me with this page, it's that the general public will swallow it, hook, line, sinker, and boat. Perhaps Mindcraft would like to publish ALL of their e-mail instead of being a typical information manipulator.
  • by Parity ( 12797 ) on Tuesday June 22, 1999 @06:49AM (#1839207)
    These are just flames, not even atypical flames in the net-world. There is nothing unique about them, except that they are selected examples posted to the web for PR purposes.

    I'm disappointed in the people who did this, but I think you have to be realistic - out of the millions of people on the net, -any- topic is going to generate a certain amount of flamage. There are always going to be a few who just -have- to vent, however incoherently. I hope everyone will try to remember that putting even one gratuitous insult in your e-mail, no matter how good it feels, is only going to get you lumped in with the people incapable of spelling or finishing a sentence without a four-letter word.

    I'm also disappointed in MindCraft. These kinds of e-mails are not unique to them, and the only appropriate response is to click 'delete.' (Mailbombs are another story - then you contact a net administrator for action.) It's no more mature to say, 'My goodness, everyone come and see how stupid and foul-mouthed this person is,' than it is to issue gratituitous and foul-mouthed insults.

    I'm almost tempted to collect an assortment of flames from MS-fanatics speaking against linux from the newsgroups and post them as a rebuttal, but that would be too hypocritical given what I just said. I don't know -how- to respond to this. It would be nice if nobody that supports linux would ever send flames, in newsgroups or by e-mail, but it's not realistic. I hope someone can think of some way responding to such things before the day Microsoft's inbox gets read - with appropriate 'bleeps' on the evening news.

  • by scherrey ( 13000 ) on Tuesday June 22, 1999 @08:58AM (#1839210) Homepage
    What complete bunk! No one who I don't know has the right to send me an email, especially one containing such drival, and then expect me to protect their privacy in return. If more people exposed such nonsense then this stuff would lighten up a bit I think. What about when you get junk mail and forward it to the domain's postmaster? Have you broken someone's privacy "rights" then?

    If you don't want something repeated then don't say it in the first place.

    Mindcraft was fully in their rights to post this stuff. Actually was pretty lame compared to what I would have expected although it certainly was unjustified flame that they did not deserve and reflects well on no one. They even had to post email from the same guy twice so this is obviously as bad as it got for them.

    I wonder if they'll be posting any of the honest critiques (from Windows and Linux users alike) any time soon? Doubt it.

  • by __aaevmb228 ( 14439 ) on Tuesday June 22, 1999 @09:00AM (#1839216)
    In the talk it was suggested that if the position was one of serious importance that the candidate was being considered for, it might be a wise idea to do a internet and usenet search for possible webpages, discussions, postings, and emails the person may have written.

    I've been doing this for years just for my own amusement, generally before a candidate comes in for a first interview. Sometimes it's quite interesting to observe answers to questions in relation to things that have been posted to the Net.

    About the Mindcraft problem: it seems to me that people need to learn that this is just business. Ethics and netiquette are going to take a back seat when there is big money involved. This is a fact of life that people around here need to accept. I'm not about to start defending these messages as "typical net flames" and take Mindcraft to task for violating netiquette.

    My mom always used to tell me never to write anything down I didn't want to see on the front page of tomorrow's newspaper. I think that's great advice. Next time you write to a feedback mail address or otherwise criticize a person or company, be aware that you have no control over that message once it's sent, and it could very well end up on a public web page.

    Try not to embarass yourself and the rest of us, okay?

  • by evilpenguin ( 18720 ) on Tuesday June 22, 1999 @08:43AM (#1839230)
    Is there any good way to call this discussion to the attention of the trade press? Anyone who has spent enough time on USENET is quite thoroughly used to the "degenerative" discussion. I used to spend a lot of time in alt.solar.photovoltaic (because of my strong interest in renewable energy). Almost every thread of discussion would eventually be taken over by the "no-nukes" and "more-nukes" camps. Hardly any discussion of photovoltaics at all. Luckily, through the miracle of the killfile, some of us had discussions. Good discussions.

    I have seen childish Windows users write in exactly the same manner as the "Linux advocates" Mindcraft posted.

    I tend to agree with Sturgeon's Law: 90% of everything is crap. He was talking about fiction, but I think the rule can be generalized to just about everything people do; even to just about everything I personally do (you have no idea how it pains me to admit that! My ego is threatening to leave me!).

    Given The Law, I reckon about the only thing we can do is:

    1) Try to think before we type.
    2) Try to imagine receiving this same message from some "brain dead twerp" (i.e., anyone who thinks differently than we do).
    3) Speak out gently against uncivil conduct.
    4) Rewrite. Often.

    This marks the third time in the last week that a fair portion of a Slashdot posting's discussion thread has concerned itself with how we sound off. I am deeply heartened by seeing the goodwill of most of us displayed. I just wish there were some effective way to bring this attention of those who see us only as pack of wild animals.

    Any suggestions?

  • Mom always said when I left to go play a Little League baseball game "Play hard and remember your not just representing yourself, your representing where you live as well." The Net has become that. Linux is a community and Little League Linuxers when the Ump doesnt make a correct call, even if one player on the field talks back to the Ump everyone hears it and sees it. One person can cast a bad view of where your from and the mumblings in the crowd and the conversations after the game affect you all. Even if the call didnt influence the outcome win or lose, you still project a bad view opf your town. Sound advice from Mom. Remember it, Live by it.
  • I dont believe you people are giving the folks at mindcraft enough credit. When windows NT loses a benchmark you dont see thousands of windows users screaming FUD and foul play. I believe, whether intentional or not, posting the flame mails they get serves a two fold purpose.
    Firstly it points out something of the maturity of the group whom you must turn to for help. The same people who flame mindcraft are the same kids who installed linux so they could teardrop people with their rootshell binary and are the same people who call other users stupid in ng's for perfectlly legit questions. If everyone that uses linux is preceived to be an asshole, how far along do you think it will get before IT people laugh it off.
    But secondly and most importantly, and rather sly on the part of mindcraft if they intended it, is a giant screaming wake up to the linux community at large. In order to be viable as a movement this sort of action MUST BE DISCOURAGED. And of course the best way to do this is have all the mature, helpful respectful experianced intelligent users openly frown on this sort of thing. Sort of a call for the Guru's and mentors out there to speak out and show that this sort of thing is unacceptable.
    Just because Linux doesnt win the benchmarks doesnt mean it is an inerior operating system. This has been stated over and over. And to write off a respected company as in the pocket of Microsoft because your favourite operating system didnt win is immature. They held a second test at their own expense to prove they are not biased. They are a company, with responsibilty and credit being their currency. Linux is a movement, if it loses creditbility it fades away, no real monetary loss, this is in sharp contrast to Mindcrafts situation. If they lose the trust of other companies, they are no longer a business. If Linux lets these k1ddies run wild and they do ruin Linux's viability as an operating system for business, I am sure Linus wont stop writing the kernel and Alan Cox wont stop patching, and linux lives, maybe not as publically as now, but lives on regardless of what people think. Keep in mind that there is a distinct and sharp contrast between a movement and a business. No more flame kids.
    And as a final note, if you think Mindcraft was paid off, prove it. Show the kickbacks that were taken. I am sure a well written letter to a lawyer somewhere could start some sort of official action with some kind of result. As opposed to all the innuendo that is circulating. And I doubt microsoft would start buying test results in the middle of an anti trust suit. Seems rather silly. My $0.02 CDN

    -- Daniel Harvey
  • Anyone who has:
    • Maintained a web page.
    • Posted regularly to USENET.

    Has gotten email like those that netcraft posted.

    While I certainly would never condone sending such inflammatory email, this is a characteristic of the Internet community, not the community of Linux users per-se.

    I've often been flamed with an onslaught of obsecnities and crude insults in response to the simplest and most benign of Usenet posts.

    Bottom line: the web is full of people on the brink of total insanity (or indeed beyond that brink) who seriously need to have their medication adjusted! These people are not exclusively associated with one subject matter.

    By posting such flames, however, Mindcraft is clearly trying to imply that the Linux community is dominated by such persons.

    This seriously lowers the credibility of Mindcraft below even the depths to which it had already sunk.
  • by Fish Man ( 20098 ) on Tuesday June 22, 1999 @11:13AM (#1839246) Homepage
    I did a little browsing at Mindcraft's web page and found the three rebuttals they have posted to articles appearing on abc.com, Salon, and Linux Today.

    Each of the above was an article that in one way or another questioned the accuracy of the Mindcraft benchmark tests.

    The tone of their rebuttals actually approaches the inflammatory nature of the flames that they posted!

    In these rebuttals they DEMAND that the sites in question (ABC, Salon, Linux Today) post retractions to their reviews, or at least add a link to Mindcraft's rebuttal to the text of their reviews!

    What crybabies!

    Mindcraft, me thinks thou dosest abide in a glass house!
  • Read the responses to this post. _This_ is the _real_ linux community.

    BTW, slashdot forums are for article responses, not frustrated linux rants. If you have a problem, it's more likely you'll get an answer in one of the many many newsgroups.
  • The thing that struck me about these emails is that if you delete the "bad words" they no are no different than what Alan Cox and others have been saying about the Mindcraft test in more public forums: the methods are poor and the test was unfair. I've never understood why certain words are arbitrarily labelled unsuitable for polite conversation. Why is "this test is shit!" an unacceptable way of saying "I disapprove of your methods and don't trust your results"? Most of these messages used the word "whore". As I understand it, Mindcraft's contract with Microsoft included a clause that prohibited them from releasing their results if they were unfavorable to Microsoft. This seems pretty close to the modern usage of the word "whore"! The "fuck you" message summed up in two words what most of us felt when we learned that Mindcraft was funded by Microsoft. These messages aren't obscene, they're just effective communication.
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • by DonkPunch ( 30957 ) on Tuesday June 22, 1999 @07:15AM (#1839271) Homepage Journal
    ...film at 11. :)

    Doesn't the "geek" stereotype includes religious devotion to one's favorite editor, language, and OS?

    I hate to imply that this immaturity is OK, but what did Mindcraft expect? If you go into the business of "proving" that one operating system is better than another, you'd better budget for a really good mailserver. A Windows vs. Mac comparison would have generated similar responses.

    What good does posting these emails on their website do? It strikes me as a PR move to say, "See how immature Linux advocates are?" As another poster said, where are the emails which systematically point out where the study was flawed? If anything, this makes me think Mindcraft is choosing sides. A real testing and benchmarking company should be above saying, "See what jerks their users are?"

    What if slashdot set up a page that includes nothing but the "Linux sucks. NT rulez" comments that show up here? Would the immaturity and foul language of those posts make certain NT advocates look like brats?

    Having said all that, those responses were pretty childish. I'm afraid that their real harm lies in the fact that Linux is not a single company, therefore Linux advocates ARE its marketing department. I don't think those responses were very good marketing.
  • As well, I couldn't believe how many times the word "whore" was used. Damn, just when I thought I had busted that glass ceiling.

    While I wouldn't use that word per se, prostitution is a good description of Mindcraft's activities of late. As a benchmarking company, they live or die by their credibility. By their actions on this test (adequately documented on this site; one of my earlier posts has the link to ESR's stuff), they have sold out their credibility. IMHO, this is indeed worse than selling out one's body.

  • by remande ( 31154 ) <remande.bigfoot@com> on Tuesday June 22, 1999 @10:07AM (#1839275) Homepage
    And to write off a respected company as in the pocket of Microsoft because your favourite operating system didnt win is immature. They held a second test at their own expense to prove they are not biased. They are a company, with responsibilty and credit being their currency.

    Some wrote off Mindcraft because it showed that NT outperformed Linux. I agree; this behavior is wrong and counterproductive.

    Other people smelled a rat, and found one (or several). These people didn't complain because NT won, but because the test was entirely rigged. This response is entirely appropriate to the situation.

    Eric Raymond collected the evidence and presents it here [slashdot.org].

    To summarize what you will find at the link:

    The test was paid for by Microsoft (a fact not originally stated by Mindcraft). Was Mindcraft paid off by Microsoft? That depends on your definition; they were indisputably paid by Microsoft. But I trust no benchmark where the ones funding it have a vested interest in the results.

    The hardware was optimal for NT, and pessimal for Linux.

    The test used dissimilar Web servers. Apache was used on Linux, while something else (IIS?) was used on NT.

    The test problem was specifically something that the Apache Web server was bad at; other Linux Web servers are better suited to this problem. While this is somewhat underhanded for an Apache test, the fact that this was supposedly not an Apache test shows the rigging.

    The NT machine was well-tuned by NT professionals. The Linux machine was poorly tuned.

    Mindcraft criticised both Red Hat support and USENET support. Later reports showed that they attempted to get tuning information from Red Hat's installation support line (which doesn't answer such questions; you have to pay for that level of service). They also showed that they made exactly one USENET post, which didn't contain enough information for a proper solution. USENET requests for more information were not replied to. In short, Mindcraft made no more than token attempts to get support.

    Mindcraft's "attempts" at tuning Linux actually made it slower than normal.

    While there is some mindless rage concerning this issue, there is a lot of well-documented righteous indignation.

  • by remande ( 31154 ) <remande.bigfoot@com> on Tuesday June 22, 1999 @09:36AM (#1839276) Homepage
    I guess we have to strike a balance between telling the truth (which, IMHO, most of those mails on Mindcraft's page *do*, albeit maybe a touch more directly than they oughta) and playing the good diplomatic game

    A lot of the "rants" I read on the Mindcraft page were zero-content. Effectively, they were all variations on "Windows Sux, D00DZ!". This is zero intelligence and sheer rage. If this is a war of Windows versus Linux, our goal is to get Bill Gates running around, screaming "Linux Sux, D00DZ!". Imagine what that would do for NT market share. Doing it ourselves doesn't help a bit.

    One need not strike a balance between truth and diplomacy, because you can maximize both. My favorite way of winning arguments is being calm, collected, rational, and right. If I can achieve this, I can drive my opponent stark raving mad; anyone who is keeping score can see who the winner is. We can do that here.

    Slashdot has been following the Mindcraft saga well. While there were some simple rants from both the Linux and Microsoft camps here, a lot of Slashdotters came up with some damning facts that made Mindcraft cringe. The best ones did so calmly and collectively, along the lines of "Hey...did anyone notice that they picked out RAID hardware with a bogus Linux driver?" or "Hmmm... Usenet only sees one post to the Linux boards as a help request," and "If they're pitting Linux versus NT, why are they only using Apache on Linux? For this sort of work, I'd choose another Linux HTTP server". Of course, we finished up with "Thanks, Mindcraft, you gave us some ideas on how to speed up Linux. See you next rev!"

    That's why Mindcraft has been dragging it out, redoing the test, asking for Linus himself. They likely expected us to pointlessly rant (which some of us did). I don't think that they expected us to pick their test to pieces in an open forum. They were completely knocked off their game, and found themselves playing ours

    At one point, Microsoft had a rant on their page calling the Linux community 'chicken' (not in so many words) for not taking Mindcraft on the offer of a retest. They seemed rather peeved at being denied the satisfaction of a rematch, even after they understood our reasons for avoiding it. You don't cut a deal with a dragon, and you don't trust Microsoft further than you can throw them.

    The truth shall set us free. Even if the majority of people don't believe us because they listen to Microsoft, a few will become Linux shops. When they report their IT budgets, their NT-using competition will take notice. If they cannot see the truth, they can read the writing on their bank accounts. And if they can't even do that, then corporate Darwinism takes over--the company that can do the same job with fewer IT dollars is likely to take over the one spending more IT dollars.

  • by -Surak- ( 31268 ) on Tuesday June 22, 1999 @07:24AM (#1839278)
    These are just flames, not even atypical flames in the net-world.

    Maybe they are typical flames for this age, with the net infiltrated by illiterate AOL users and the like. I don't know, I haven't used usenet except through Dejanews in years now, and the lists I'm on are pretty tame. But I remember when a good flame was one that ripped apart the claims and opinions that someone made on a technical basis, rather than attacking the person themselves. They didn't include excessive profanity, either.

    This is embarassing. And Mindcraft is well within their rights to do what they did - it's a good PR move, since it does make it look like we're all a bunch of raving loonies. They don't have to fight on technical merits, when the linux community brings the discussion to this level.
  • by hey! ( 33014 ) on Tuesday June 22, 1999 @09:46AM (#1839287) Homepage Journal
    Netiquette...

    How I miss it. But, it was always a losing battle anyway.

    Actually, if they cherry picked their e-mail for the ripest comments, I'd have to say these flames are remarkably tame. I also think it is interesting that they didn't post the helpful comments they got; it calls into mind their impartiality.

    In any case, reposting these e-mails on their site is in bad taste. It's analagous to somebody whispering "f*ck you" in your ear, then your getting up on a chair in a public place and yelling "Hey everybody, he just said 'f*ck you'!"
  • by IIH ( 33751 ) on Tuesday June 22, 1999 @09:57AM (#1839291)
    Dear MindCraft,

    Thank you for publishing some of the correspondence you have recieved from
    some vocal linux users. What I find interesting that all of the email you have
    displayed have been offensive and immature. While any reasonable person will
    admit that in any mass of people there are extremes in any direction, the same
    reasonable people would not infer the behaviour of the group form the actions
    of a minority.

    Your inital tests raised several issues (and found some bugs, now fixed -
    thanks!) about the imbalance between the setup for NT and Linux, details of
    which can be found on any reputable news source, so I shouldn't need to
    reiterate them here. The general conclusion you attempted to dervive from that
    specific setup (NT is x times faster than Linux) was at best flawed, at worst
    contrived. I could not fairly compare a mini falling over a cliff, and a
    ferrai towing a trailer up a steep road, and infer that "a mini has better
    acceleration than a ferrai" (even if it would have correct for that one case)

    What I find most interesting is the similariaties between the emails you chose
    to post, and your initial benchmark "results". In the benchmarking you drew a
    general conclusion from one specific setup. In posting only the offensive email
    you have recieved, I would infer that you are trying to create a general
    impression that the only email you had recieved was offensive, which I find
    hard to believe. Drawing a general conclusion from a minority of bad cases, is
    one of the main problems many people had with your inital test.

    You advertise as an independent testing/benchmarking company, and since you
    are doing these tests at your own expense, I assume you are trying to retain
    that image of giving fair and accurate results. If you are indeed interested
    in giving a balanced view, I would encourage you to post a representive
    sample of all the email you have recieved about these tests.

    If, however, you are releasing the hate mail solely as an attempt at PR, I
    would remind you of a saying of Salvor Hardin (see Foundation) "An atom
    blaster can point both ways". By attempting to discredit the people who
    pointed out the flaws in your benchmark, and failing, the flaws become more
    and more apparent. The initial benchmark was unbalanced. The release of only
    selected emails was unbalanced. Is "unbalanced" the image an "impartial"
    testing company should be trying to have?

    As a side point, IANAL, posting selected, offensive content, to try and
    give the impression that all linux user are immature/offensive, and to provoke
    a reaction from the less controled reader, could be categorised as "Flamebait",
    but there may be a risk that it could be also described as incitment to
    hatred. I assume you had different reasons for just posting the offensive
    emails.

    There are two sides to every story, and if you wish for people to
    think you are a balanced company, you should give balanced views, and that
    includes showing a fair sample of the emails you have recieved. (And sent as a
    response, also, as we have no idea if these were a inital email, or as a
    response to something you said to them)


    In short, may the FUD you spread be Fair, Unbiased, Data

    Yours, etc.
    --
  • Here's what I had to say to Mindcraft. I think that this s#!t is getting out of hand:

    To whom it may concern,

    I was reading your Net Rage article after reading about it on Slash Dot. I must say that I am offended that you would reprint such garbage on your web site. Some Linux advocates are teenagers and don't even know what they are talking about and are usually expressing some sort of angst...posting these e-mails will probably give you more flack than the original study that you did.

    On the benchmarks, I never give much credit to any--especially across platforms. My 66MHz Mac continuously outperformed my 233MHz Windows NT box when the NT box had only 64MB of RAM and the Mac had 72MB of RAM from the standpoint of the user interface, such menu reaction time and application launch time. This is completely irrelevant to anything else, because the NT box is really faster at doing more things in the same amount of time (I would hope).

    It seems pointless to argue that Linux or NT is better based on one set of benchmarks on one machine. I seriously doubt that NT would outperform Linux on a 16MHz i386 with 16MB of RAM! For fairness sake, why don't you benchmark Linux and NT on a full spectrum of computer hardware from a 386 to the fastest multi-processor NT machine. And not just Linux, why not Solaris, SCO Unix, Rhapsody, and FreeBSD? Your tests make it seem that you are biased, and people will respond accordingly, though not appropriately. MacWorld benchmarks show that NT+IIS is very fast--much faster than Solaris and MacOS X! Posting a full set of benchmarks will give you more credibility kudos than posting offensive e-mail.

    Sincerely,

    #MY REAL NAME#
  • In all issues surrounding email abuse it
    is standard to provide full header
    information.

    These examples dosn't show the full headers,
    there is a strange Sent: header line,
    which isn't in the standard Date: format.
    Also the From: lines look suspcious.

    This page smells of rats...

    As stands there is little reason for beliving
    that any of the items were ever real emails.
  • Looks pretty immature to me.
    Funny thing is that most of them are displayed with e-maiil address and all. It seems the writers have little experience with the fact that e-mail, especially a strongly worded one, can just go off and start living a life of its own.
    And then all over sudden things look a lot different. For instance, would you do business with Pekka.Honkonen@tieto.com at www.tietotech.fi?
  • by _Sprocket_ ( 42527 ) on Tuesday June 22, 1999 @09:05AM (#1839312)
    I run a web page and even I get e-mail like that.

    Publish anything on the 'net and you're bound to attract a Netkook of one type or another. Publish something that's based on opinion or controversal subjects and you're bound to attact more.

    Mindcraft, of course, did this in spades. They published something highly controversal about a subject know to be turf for more than a few kooks.

    Is it surpising that they got flames and abuse? No. Is it likely that they only got a few? No. Is it likely this latest bit is a favored selection of the worse? Yes. Does it excuse the behavior of those who did it? No in the slightest.

    Mindcraft has helped us. They've pointed out weeknesses. If we choose, we can find technical goals in their "tests" and critisisms. We can silence their most outlandish claims with facts and make what facts they've uncovered moot points by fixing what is wrong.

    Now Mindcraft helps us in another way. They held up a mirror to the very ugly images (and given them names!) that we as a community tend to show to outsiders.

    It offers us a chance to think about our actions and reflect on how we appear socially (call it "product politics"). Are we helping our cause, or are we giving the MS Marketing department/FUD squad all the material they need? Nice of us to make it easy for them.

  • by 1984 ( 56406 ) on Tuesday June 22, 1999 @06:42AM (#1839328)
    if (thing == mine) {
    print "This is fantastic\n";
    }
    else {
    print "Horseshit. Total horseshit. And yo mama is a who' \n";
    }

    Ask any eight year-old, they'll tell you.
  • by fete ( 61267 ) on Tuesday June 22, 1999 @09:29AM (#1839333)
    You mean the word 'netiquette' still has meaning? In the usenet world of 1999? Surely you jest. Probably 90% of NNTP traffic today consists of people stripping attachments (pornography and warez) out of the .BINARY newsgroups. There are commercial applications for that express purpose these days (i.e. NewsBin, Pluckitt.) Hint: those programs IGNORE the text part of the message. That a site like Slashdot exists and thrives is testimony to the fact that the public forums have died in a sea of pollution. The discussions have been privatized; they occur on formus like Slashdot and closed mailing lists now.

    Netiquette is dead. It's been replace by owners of private message bases, some who recruit moderators.
  • It's quite easy to see that a minority are not able to conduct themselves when presented with information that they do not agree with. The anger and lack of thought are obvious from this. I think that we ought to use the hacker ethic to solve this problem as well.

    If this were a kernel bug, everyone would band together and work on producing a fix. It may not be good to have bugs in code, but we deal with them. We use a coding format, so that the high quality of code remains no matter how many people work on it.

    In responding to unfavorable response, we can do the same thing. We have some form of organised forum/organisation (press office?) which lays down the facts based on the situation, so that people are aware of the full situation. Perhaps also give links to rebuttle evidence and so that we will get 'an official line' of response that anyone from newbie to wizard can understand and follow.

    Then encourage people to write a ordered response incorporating the facts. Keep it objective, and add personal feeling without resorting to name calling and slander. It gives our enemies more ammunition. Ask for the person/organisation to respond; They may have been mistaken after all, and will offer an apology.

    This way, the responses are from different individuals, but give the same positive criticism. It's difficult for someone bent on destroying our reputation using several hundred or thousand Emails that have no flame value. Chances are, that they will not be able to get anything to use and hopefully give up, or even come back saying that we did a good job, which adds to our reputation.

    If it turns out that the Linux position is weak, and the comment is justifiable, then rather than complaining about it, we add it to the tasklist and fix so it so it does not happen again. Don't forget to thank the person for pointing it out, if it was not already known. There is nothing wrong in being wrong if you fix it, and tell people you have. We can earn respect in the same way from bug fixes - why not any other aspects of Linux use/development?

    If we can indicate (organise) the response we want, then we can be sure the minority are not representative and we can't be hurt from episodes like this again.

    In the Linux bazaar we inhabit, we need to win new minds outside of our area over to the benefits of free software and information to grow bigger. We need everyone - users, developers, schools, businesses, governments. We need to be showing everyone that we look after those who follow us, and welcome those who want to join in. If we respond with hatred, we drive people away who may be potential users, and play into the hands of people who want to stop Linux at any cost. We can't afford to miss our chance. It may not come again.
  • Yes, these are run-of-the-mill flamage. Yes, the posters are dufi. Yes, Mindcraft violated netiquette by posting private email.

    And yes, this all might have a significant negative impact on the perception of Linux, particularly among IT managers.

    Microsoft has gotten off the dime with regard to the threat it perceives from free software. Linux had half as many server shipments as NT last year according to one source, and its share is growing faster than NT's. The Empire of Redmondium will pull out all the stops to convince IT managers that Linux is a sloppy, unbusiness-like series of hacks perpetrated by wheat-germ eating comsymps, pimply faced pre-teenagers and dangerous, cranky, unix-crazed hackers with antisocial attitudes and day jobs as crack salesmen.

    If I were a conspiricy theorist, I'd worry that posting the more revolting, rage-filled tirades of the inevitable double handful of know-nothing Linux bigots was a deliberate and pre-planned strategic move on the part of MS and its hench-firms. Alas, they didn't need to bother with scheming over this one. Those tirades were inevitable once Bill decided to take Linux on.

    It's not that MS doesn't do underhanded things that make even fairly level-headed and well-informed Linux bigots mad. It's just that the predictable responses of some plays right into the hands of Mr Gates' efforts to portray the free software community as an enemy of free enterprise and a bad bet for your server farm.

    Microsoft is engaged in a no-holds-barred propaganda war for the hearts and minds of Information Technology managers . They will use real facts, psychology, rigged and unrigged benchmarks, lies told by others and deniable lies told by themselves to create FUD, FUD and more FUD. They will hammer and pry on real and perceived weaknesses of the Linux community to drive home the point that Linux is not a good choice for the back office.

    All Linux has going for it is immortality. You guys don't have to win this war. You don't even have to fight it . Just keep writing free software. Your best efforts will live forever. Or fight the battles, but don't lose the ultimate goal of writing useful software for its own sake. It would be truly sad and ironic if Linux won a significant place in the server racks of corporate planet Earth, but lost the grand vision that has driven it and other free software to a position within striking distance of huge success.

    Well, there's always FreeBSD. 8)

    Peace,
    Howard

  • by ufdraco ( 78193 ) on Tuesday June 22, 1999 @08:49AM (#1839355)
    From what I've seen so far, many of the Slashdot comments aren't much more impressive. It seems that no matter what the topic of the day is, talk of M$ gets into it. What does M$ have anything to do with nanomachines?!!? Nothing. But, some AC flamed about them anyway. But when somebody pointed that out, he--and not the original poster--was moderated down for being off-topic (since then, that has been corrected). Furthermore, dattaway said "Could it be there really is a problem with Microsoft? Nah...couldn't be!" is still at +2--apparently his default post level (thus a "respected member of the community). How is this going to impress anyone?! When we can police ourselves, we often don't! Yes, it has been fixed now (somewhat) but comments are a work in progress--do you really expect people to keep checking back to see if we moderated people down? The point remains--at one point the AC protesting the M$ bashing was moderated down and the original AC was not (you'll have to talk to CmdrTaco for proof of that). Therefore, this is something that affects even us, and not from "a few poor misinformed people that just don't know better." This is commonplace! Iambe encountered it in #Linux (see userfriendly, it should be in the archives) as well, and she's a devout Linuxer! It doesn't matter how much you are provoked or how stupid you think somebody is! If you respond with nothing more than childish four letter words, you aren't going to be respected!

    I remember reading on USENET about somebody who posted to both the Linux and NT advocacy forums a question about the merits of the 2 OS's handling of multitasking. He said that he got flames from both the NT and Linux sides on the matter--but far more Linux flames. Furthermore, he got more substance out of the NT people. For saying that, he got far more flamage concerning how he shouldn't have posted to advocacy forums if he didn't want flames (?!?) and that he was lying because he wouldn't show them the offending emails. You can't win against this sort of thing!! And that is going to turn people off about Linux faster than anything else!

    People who say that we don't need to care and that flaming is ok as long as it's pro-Linux are sadly mistaken, I'd say. In business, it's PR and not merit that often wins the day because people don't have much patience to sit down and learn all the merits of one system over another. It is terrifying to think that there are people out there that are looking for valueable information in a non-confrontational way and get flamed to death for not being born with the knowledge! That, plain and simple, is unacceptable, IMHO.

    I don't pretend to have solutions, but one idea I've seen floating around that I really like is that we take responsibility for this--like the adults we are. We should form some sort of advocacy group, very public, that won't flame and give us all a bad image. Anytime we need a statement to be made, they will make it in a professional well-thought manner. And what they say should be recognised as basically the final word--no need for flames, etc (we might hope). I fear that there may be a lot of people that could represent Linux well, but don't choose too. We need more people taking an active role that would also be a positive influence.

    If this gets marked down, so be it--it'll only prove my point. Please! Prove me wrong.

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Working...