3 ms·
Because Tom didn't demand they go balls-to-the-wall fighting what may be an inevitably losing battle to disprove something that isn't disprovable? I don't know
by danielweber 13y ago
Because Tom didn't demand they go balls-to-the-wall fighting what may be an inevitably losing battle to disprove something that isn't disprovable?
I don't know what happened, but this outcome might be very much in Tom's well-considered best interests. You are making a no-win situation.
EDIT: Heck, I don't even know if you are mad at GitHub for insufficiently defending Tom or insufficiently crucifying him
- steele 13y agogjvc is using their small slice of economic leverage to weigh in; the motivations are no one else's business unless gjvc volunteers this. Given the baiting questions you pose, what incentive does gjvc have to address your curiosity?
- danielweber 13y agoIt's not really "weighing in" to send up a confusing signal, despite (especially?) if it's very emphatic.
- gjvc 13y agohttps://twitter.com/nrrrdcore/status/459358875213238272 https://twitter.com/nrrrdcore/status/459358875213238272