Re: This FOSS Thang :-)

-hh wrote:
 

chrisv wrote:

>
Not.

>
Except for how chrisv admits it below ... oops!

 No I don't.  You are lying ... oops!
 

it was about how some folks
foolishly try to make claims without any objective support.

>
Notice, everyone, the magic shape-shifting argument.

>
Except for how chrisv admits it below ... oops!

 Ridiculous nonsense ... oops!
 

The point has already been made that no "objective support" is needed,
to know what one likes.

>
Oh, look:  chrisv trying to claw back to the original subject!

 Oh, look:  -highhorse trying to evade my point!
 

The point has already been made that no advocate has claimed personal
tastes are objective or generalizable to everyone else.

>
But if that were actually true, then they'd not posted, rather than to
advocate for their (...wait for it...) personal preference.

 No one with a brain is going to buy your made-up "if that were
actually true" idiocy.  The point has been made, and it is correct.
Your *lies* to the contrary are just that.
 

If anyone is guilty of that, it's -highhorse, with his implications
that rich companies who have lots of users giving lots of feedback are
going be objectively better.

>
Bigger sample sizes yield better estimates.
Why did chrisv fail Statistics 101?

 See how he accepted my point, everyone?  All this time, he's been
attacking us for what he is guilty of.
 

Again, -highhorse conjures shit up that no normal person could have
thought what the issue was, at all.  He's 180 degrees from it!

>
Nope, DFS was already man enough to step up and admit that he wrote an
ambiguous statement ... way back in August 2012.

 I recognized that and addressed it, here:
 <s15g0j1pg664ch080rvjin27d4bf6uqeki@4ax.com>

 My interpretation of DumFSck's "ambiguous" statement has always been
correct.  You attacked with *lies* and he supported you.
 This is not in dispute.
 

Which means that
you've been dry-humping that line for more than a decade.

 Nope.  See above.  You both attacked our reasonable position with
*lies*.
 

FFS, all along he's been a Photoshop defender!  Obviously!
>
Sheesh!

>
When one is experienced enough to know what the right tool is for a job,
one uses said correct tool if one has it in your toolbox, and if one
doesn't have it, if you're also smart .. you go and get it.

 Poor -highhorse, pretending to be the "reasonable" one, here.
 The cola advocates have *always* been reasonable, on this issue.
Since we were so clearly correct and reasonable, and you were so badly
defeated, all you could do was respond with *lies*.
 

OTOH, if you're a luzer linux troll fanboy fool, you try to claim that
GIMP is "70,000 better" and get humiliated by literally _everyone_.

 Check this out, folks.  He's so butthurt and desparate that he's
trying to attck me with something that some other idiot did!  He
thinks that he can "win" with such garbage!
 Talk about your luzer lying troll fanboy fools!