5 ms·

If they mention Groklaw...

• jerf 14y ago
  Then I will go back and upmod everything you wrote two days ago. http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4342363 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4342363 What will you do if they don't?
• SwellJoe 14y ago
  I'd believe that Oracle has employed people to attack PJ's integrity, before I'd believe that PJ is in the employ of Google. There's a problem with making these kinds of vague (and not so vague) accusations against PJ in a place like this. Many of us remember the SCO v. IBM case, and have been following Groklaw for years. SCO tried slinging the same kind of mud at PJ you're slinging now. None of it stuck, because it was obviously unfounded and obviously disingenuous.
  • madrona 14y ago
    I've noticed that the attacks are quite vague and consist of demanding some sort of proof that PJ is not engaged this or that (e.g. eating babies.) Also, there's some ridiculous notion that she hides behind a pseudonym because she uses her initials as her nom de plume. See: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4014768 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4014768 , you might want to select the page text so you can decipher the downvoted comments.
    • lmm 14y ago
      "PJ" really is a pseudonym (and I think it's fair to call it that even if we now know who she is); per her own post (http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20050414214437589 http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20050414214437...) she'd originally intended to remain anonymous.
      • deleted 14y ago
        [deleted]