Re: This FOSS Thang :-)

On 3/31/24 11:31 AM, chrisv wrote:

Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
 

-highhorse wrote

>
some dumb fsck wrote:

>
Your original quote:
"Specifically, they whine about how Photoshop costs £600 and is a
waste, while claiming that the same capabilities can be accomplished
for free."
>
I unintentionally made it sound like you felt that way about Photoshop,
when you were just recapping the position of the "advocates":

 Confirming that my interpretation of it was spot-on.  Not that there
was ever any doubt of my correctness.

False, because the original authors have stated that they misstated, so your claimed interpretation is wrong.  You now know that, so continuing to persist in using a known misstatement means that you know that you're deliberately trying to deceive readers.

 

Ah, got it; no worries.
>
The irony is that you wrote that back in Aug 2012, yet chrisv is still
trying to dry-hump it...while never actually properly addressing the

            ======== (what -hh is doing to DFS)

 Heh.  And vice versa!

Nope.  As I said to Chris Ashlstrom, I had questioned where your quote came from, as I didn't believe it was a quote of my words. DFS made good by saying that it was his and that he had unintentionally had misstated and in doing so changed my comments' tone, which I've accepted as an unintentional error, not malice.

original point.
>

Creepy Chris Ahlstrom: "Yeah, everyone who wants to manipulate images
needs to pay $600 for Photoshop and then use only a 16th of its
functionality.  <rolls eyes>"

>
A perfectly valid point. Not whining.

 A perfect example of our position, and obviously reasonable.
Definitely not supporting the lying charges of -highhorse and DumFSck.
Why does the dumb fsck bring it up?  Who knows?

The "dumb fsck" who brought it up now was you, because you're still using it as a .sig file quote.  That you know that it was a misstatement error makes your continued use of it malicious.

 

<bs brevsnip>

>
That's 4 for 4 whining on money, yet we're somehow supposed to believe
that no Linux fanboy considers cost a factor on Linux 'superiority';

 Oh, is that what has been claimed, that no Linux fanboy considers cost
a factor?

No, for the sarcastic point here is something that's unchanged in COLA: FOSS fanboys invariably make statements which show that they put their out-of-pocket $ cost as their most important metric over all others.

 

seems more that they know of their wallet's personal inadequacies!  /s

>
-hh raising a straw man just to knock it down. :-D

 He's shamelessly dishonest.
 

Hint: *everyone* factors cost into what they decide to purchase, or not.

 

Sure, but it is only the Linux DIY fanboys would choose to walk over a mile of glass and hot lava just to save 59 cents.
-hh