Path: csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: vallor Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy Subject: Re: A Big Linux Cock pokes out half of Appils eye Date: 27 Apr 2016 05:38:45 GMT Lines: 132 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: individual.net aliPMhzpy94VlUk4mTDFQQgws/gOTL6znneQE+ID1q71UgAxkx Cancel-Lock: sha1:vHPX3N6iQW+sL/l/Ynjvv2jHkts= X-Face: $FV2_=&Q|WB`]oRnO!CA~)A9di!0[Gwr1lw!1E`1kB On 2016-04-25 11:06 PM, owl wrote: >> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Alan Baker wrote: >>> On 2016-04-25 10:58 PM, owl wrote: >>>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Alan Baker wrote: >>>>> On 2016-04-25 10:39 PM, owl wrote: >>>>>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Alan Baker wrote: >>>>>>> On 2016-04-25 10:09 PM, owl wrote: >>>>>>>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Alan Baker >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 2016-04-25 9:41 PM, owl wrote: >>>>>>>>>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Alan Baker >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On 2016-04-25 9:13 PM, owl wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Alan Baker >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2016-04-25 8:58 PM, owl wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So you'll just not deal with the actual subject under >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> discussion... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I just addressed your statement. Presumably your statement >>>>>>>>>>>>>> is part of the subject under discussion. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> You addressed one my statements. You snipped the rest. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> See if you can show a little moral courage and just answer. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes or no: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Do you think that the fact that Time Machine uses directory >>>>>>>>>>>>> hard links to do what it does is actually support for the >>>>>>>>>>>>> idea that "OSX is crap"? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I told you I don't care about Time Machine. But if the >>>>>>>>>>>> implementation of Time Machine via directory hardlinks is >>>>>>>>>>>> what led to OS X allowing users to create directory >>>>>>>>>>>> hardlinks, then the answer is "yes." >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Failure to answer the question noted. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> The answer was a conditional "yes". Failure to read noted. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> No. Another question, which was not asked was answered "yes". >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> No. Pay attention: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> IF ( The implementation of Time Machine via directory hardlinks >>>>>>>> is what >>>>>>>> led to OS X allowing users to create directory hardlinks >>>>>>>> ) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> THEN ( "Yes," I think that the fact that Time Machine uses >>>>>>>> directory >>>>>>>> hardlinks to do what it does is actually support for >>>>>>>> the idea that "OS X is crap" ) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> As I said: it answered a question that was not asked. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Try again. >>>>>> >>>>>> LOL. They just don't come any slower than you, do they? >>>>>> >>>>>> This was your question: >>>>>> >>>>>> Do you think that the fact that Time Machine uses directory hard >>>>>> links to do what it does is actually support for the idea that "OSX >>>>>> is crap"? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> My answer is a conditional "yes." >>>>>> >>>>>> This is the condition: >>>>>> >>>>>> if the implementation of Time Machine via directory hardlinks is >>>>>> what led to OS X allowing users to create directory hardlinks >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> It is a strawman you have set up. >>>>> >>>>> If the reason that Linux users are insufferable little pricks is the >>>>> reason that no one wants to use Linux... >>>>> >>>>> ...then the answer to whether Linux sucks is "yes". >>>> >>>> No strawman.. >>>> >>>> Do I think that the fact that you use gasoline in your mop bucket is >>>> the reason you suck as a janitor? >>>> >>>> Yes, if your choice to use gasoline in your mop bucket is what caused >>>> the Burger King to burn down. >>> >>> But yours was to avoid moving the conversation back where it belonged. >>> >>> Yes: a strawman. >>> >>> >> Nope. I answered the question you posed. If there was a strawman, >> you built it. And by the way, straw and gasoline don't play well >> together either. >> >> > No. You avoided answering the question I posed. > > If you had answered it, you would simply have typed a "yes" or a "no". > > :-) Logical fallacy, loss of down. Plurium interrogationum / Many questions This fallacy occurs when someone demands a simple (or simplistic) answer to a complex question. "Are higher taxes an impediment to business or not? Yes or no?" http://infidels.org/library/modern/mathew/logic.html#manyq -- -v "Desktops, workstations and servers are and Microsoft is doing very well. AS well as Linux." -"Slimer"