RH9 disks on the net.

[Thomas D. Ward]

Well, the main problem here is that Darel's message was not worded properly.
When I read the message I had taken the wording as if he was implying that
Red Hat was doing it to screw us. Which is not their intentions at all.
In the future a simple question such as: "Why did Red Hat pull speakup,"
have served the purpose better.
We do not need to insult Red Hat by comparing their polacies of CE classes
and there software.
If speakup hadn't been such a conflict and had been more modulerized it
probably would have stayed.
They have kept festival, emacspeak, etc and they haven't tossed them into
the garbage so any implied, suggested, or other notions about Red Hat
abandoning adaptive Linux distros is baseless.



----- Original Message -----
From: Janina Sajka <janina at rednote.net>
To: <speakup at braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Monday, April 07, 2003 9:26 PM
Subject: Re: RH9 disks on the net.


> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup at braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup