3 ms·
Your character wasn't attacked, your credibility was. It's perfectly legitimate to question your credibility if the questioner believes your source to be biased
by yock 16y ago
Your character wasn't attacked, your credibility was. It's perfectly legitimate to question your credibility if the questioner believes your source to be biased.
An ad Hominem attack would be calling you stupid for linking the biased source. That didn't happen.
- gnosis 16y agoThe ad hominem was made against techrights, not against me. I didn't even make an argument. I just linked to a few articles that criticized Microsoft's "Promise". Did tsz address the substance of techrights' argument? No. He just smeared them by implying that merely citing an article by them would make me lose credibility. That is a perfect example of an ad hominem. Attacking me was more of a case of shooting the messenger.
- kprobst 16y ago> smeared them If you do a Google site search on that blog you'll see that the term 'smear' is used endlessly and quite carelessly by the author. It's interesting to see that you use it in the same way - and like the author I don't think you understand very well what the term means. I sure hope "gnosis" isn't one of the various aliases the guy allegedly uses across the internet, including on Slashdot where he became a bit of a legend for maintaining dozens of them.
- gnosis 16y agoI don't think I have to point out that this is yet another ad hominem. But, be that as it may, I'll just say that yesterday was the first day I've even heard of techrights, when I found their site through a google search. And, honestly, I don't even care much about Mono. I'm just very suspicious of anything originating from Microsoft, and the techrights and FSF articles support these (well founded) suspicions.
- nyellin 16y agoStop. Stop. Stop. Instead of dancing in circles, please look at the contact information I posted above. Miguel de Icaza is a good guy. I am certain he will answer any questions you might have.