RH9 disks on the net.

[Janina Sajka]

Luke Davis writes:

"I have not investigated, and do not intend to investigate, the facts he
 listed."

Facts? What facts? There were no "facts" in that post, just allegations.
Rather outrageous ones, too.

PS: I leave your patronizing "so, dear" without further comment.

> From: Luke Davis <ldavis at shellworld.net>
> 
> On Mon, 7 Apr 2003, Janina Sajka flamed, attacked, and misconstrued
> thusly:
> 
> > Darrell Shandrow writes:
> >
> > "Red Hat recently decided to deliberately deny equal access."
> 
> Actually, I believe this comment, which you so neatly took out of context,
> originally was:
> 
> > Some will recall that Red Hat recently decided to deliberately deny
> > equal access to its training material as offered to those whom decide to
> > take their week-long RHCE training classes.  Oh, well...
> 
> He appears to be stating fact, here, not spreading baseless "trash", as
> you state.
> 
> You further quoted him as saying:
> 
> > "Wonder if this is an extension of a revised policy to deny
> > accessibility,"
> 
> First, not only is this quote taken out of context, it is also taken out
> of order.  It is supposed to appear *above* the former statement, which
> then serves to support the content of this one.
> Further, he did not state this as fact, but proposed as conjecture, and,
> moreover, posed it in the form of a question, as such not even claiming it
> to be fact, but asking whether it might be the case, given the fact of the
> denial of access he later mentioned.
> 
> > you only make yourself sound like a bigot and an idiot.
> 
> And you make yourself appear highly illogical, and as someone who wishes
> to stir up trouble on the forum, by constantly attacking anyone who does
> not hold a carbon copy of your own biases and opinions.  There is nothing
> wrong with debating his statements.  However, doing so with more facts,
> and with logic, will get you much further, and might actually win you the
> argument such as it is, than will emotional outbursts, such as the one
> you have just exhibited here and in the past, and, no doubt, such as that
> of which I will soon surely be the target.
> 
> > Or, are you claiming some inside knowledge of new policies at RH? If so,
> > kindly provide documentation. We'd all like to know about that.
> 
> It is worth noting, that he did not state that there was such a policy,
> but merely suggested, and asked, whether there might be one, given recent
> actions on the part of Redhat.
> I have not investigated, and do not intend to investigate, the facts he
> listed.  However, an investigation of same might be in order, so that you
> can coherently argue to the contrary.
> 
> > Else, we just know more about you. Perhaps you've just been hearing
> > voices?
> 
> Case in point.  Now, not only have you stopped debating the issue you hold
> so dear, all be it as non-realisticly as you did, you have reverted to
> personal insults, perhaps in an effort to divert attention from the issue
> at hand, by involving him in an emotional response?  Have you ever
> considered running for political office?
> 
> Luke
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup at braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

-- 
	
				Janina Sajka, Director
				Technology Research and Development
				Governmental Relations Group
				American Foundation for the Blind (AFB)

Email: janina at afb.net		Phone: (202) 408-8175