William Hunt wrote:

>
>
> Well I'm not suprised: ANC posts an article, then fails to face
> (by snipping) any discussion of the original article. All we are
> left with is one half of an out-of-context simile. One half of
> a simile is nonsense. But the word 'market' is all that is needed
> to launch another ANC disjointed diatribe. None the less, I will
> try to answer each point ANC raises in response:
>
>
> On Mon, 27 Mar 2006, ANC wrote:
>> William Hunt wrote:
>>> This is similar to ANC's faulty application of market share, which
>>> fails to understand Slackware's intended market.
>>
>> There is an 'intended market' for Slackware?
>
> I would appear so, or perhaps better called a 'target market',
> or 'target audience'. You might consider:
>
> (1) official statements from slackware,
> eg., Danile de Kok references http://www.slackware.com/info .
> (2) Slackware's ongoing market presence,
> eg., http://store.slackware.com/
>
> It is good that you bite the 'intended market' bait, for that gets
> right to my point: Any discussion of marketshare is simply nonsense
> without some underlying definition of the market being shared,
> (comepeted in, competed over, pursued or served, according to one's
> business philosophy). It is good because the lack of any such foundation
> is the fatal flaw that makes most of the arguments you post based on
> market share sheer nonsense. It's a broken crutch. Sometimes a
> crutch is needed, that's okay. But your's is broken, it doesn't
> support anything. Fix it or leave it behind, it's an embarrasement.
>
>
>> OK, what IS that market? Give
>> me the demographics of this 'market'..... sex, urban/suburban/rural,
>> education level, income level, education level, occupation 'class', age,
>> race, nationality, home-owner/renter, and so on. Whom does Slackware
>> appeal to? Why? Whom does it not appeal to? Finally what are the
>> personality profiles of people in this market. How is this market
>> reached?
>
> If you want to present some argument based upon some specific metric
> value of some arbitrary demographic category, then fine, please, do so.
> Do your own homework. Prove it. Otherwise this is just irrelevent
> nonsense, for the apparent purpose only of leading us in to:
>
>> Two years
>> ago I could have given you all the above but I'm been beaten up so badly
>> over the issue I've come over to the other side and agree that it
>> obviously can't be about market share because there is no market! Now you
>> say I'm wrong?
>
> So what's the point here? Are we discussing a Debian fan's experience
> with Slackware, or are we discussing the Slackware market, or are we
> discussing ANC ?
>
>
>>
>> Anyway, you said it... so prove it... or at least show some anecdotal
>> evidence about this so-called 'intended market.' And if you don't have
>> that then just spout your opinion... that's fine too.
>
> Sure:
>
> (A) assume (2) above to be true;
> therefore, a market exists;
>
> (B) assume (1) above to be true;
> therefore, a target market is defined;
>
> (C) A and B imply a target market exists.
>
> QED.
>
> So now, what here might you dispute ?
>
> (Free Clue: One could argue A|B|C false ).
>
>
> For anecdotal evidence about 'intended market', given that Slackware's
> owner(s) do not publicly discuss their business plan, I would suggest
> to simply observe the existing Slackware market operation and draw
> your own conclusion. Then, to the degree that is consistent with the
> official statements, and in lieu of any other reasoned theory or
> contradicting evidence, assume that the market actually being served
> is the intended market.
>
>
> If you want demographic metrics or segment analysis or strategic
> analysis, you'll need to do your own homework.
>
>
> And to "just spout [my] opinion", Slackware works for me because it
> provides the features facilities and resources I wante in a simple,
> stable, secure and convenient package. So, I would assume a similar
> description of the target market. Works for me.
>
>
> Okay. I think that answers your request. Any questions? Do you have
> any information about this target market, or lack of one, that
> might contradict my conclusions ?
>
>
>> You're the first person in
>> three years that has ever used the word "market" with respect to
>> Slackware Linux, Inc.'s operating system software.
>
> The available evidence refutes this statement:
> eg., google groups for '"market share" OR marketshare' under
> alt.os.linux.slackware returns some 4500 articles.
> Pay attention and do your homework.
>
>
>> Forget about the flames you will
>> get for going against the pack of wild dogs that seek to dominate this
>> group.
>
> As an aside, the only flames I've ever received myself in aols have come
> from either ANC or rm. Well maybe two or three others, perhaps, and an
> early appointment to the AOLS Bozo list. But given that the preponderance
> of flame in aols is either to or from that pair, it's not inordinate that
> little or nothing comes my way from other sources.
>
> Does that mean I'm one of your 'wild dogs' ?
>
> Regardless, and continuing on with your article:
>
>
>> I think there are bunch of us who might be interested in your
>> analysis. I know I am.
>
> I doubt that. Really. You just snipped without comment my entire
> analysis of your original article, save for one half of a simile
> and a concluding comment (unsuportive of your continuing personal
> attacks on others from behind a posture of persecution). I snipped
> and ignored the personal attacks, thinking them irrelevent to the
> quoted article you presented. It seems I was wrong, for there in
> was the whole meaning of your post. The same behaviour is again
> demonstrated below:
>
>>
>>> (4)
>>> the sadly typical ANC package of paranoia and insults,
>>> snipped and ignored.
>>
>> Ignored? You obviously read them... and have commented on them... so you
>> obviously have not 'ignored' them. Which was good because that was the
>> BEST part of the troll-post. I snared Admiral Dan (the Village People's
>> navy man) but I'm terribly disappointed that I didn't lure his other
>> cloaked collaborator 'ken' ... but I believe he is away on spring break
>> in Florida drinking Frozen Pina Coladas with buxom blonde college babes.
>> Oh to be 21 again!
>>
>> anc
>
> The dichotomy of course is not to read or ignore, but to respond
> or ignore. One can hear an obnoxious noise yet ignore it, putting
> the obnmoxiousness out of one's conciousness.
>
> Imagine you are in temple.
> Imagine the elder rabbi farts loudly.
> How do you respond?
> Imagine a young boy at the back of the congregation farts loudly.
> How do you respond?
>
> Obviously, I've already wasted my time reading your article.
> I chose to not respond to your diverse personal attacks. I chose to
> snip rather than propogate your insults. I told you straight up
> what I snipped and why. Yet even that becomes an issue for you.
>
> Why do you find an issue with that? I can only conclude that the ANC
> package of feigned persecution and scattered insult is the whole entire
> part and parcel of the ANC message, such that everything else is merely
> a vehicle used to carry the ANC package.
>
> Show me where I'm wrong.
>
>
>
> But, I -do- find it hilarious, that you can cite the names of the
> members of the Village People. Do you have a favourite?
>
>
>

Jeez, Louise William. That was about the greatest crock of crap posting that
has been on this group in I don't know how long. Whatever your point was,
was lost in the expression of your own ego. I left the ENTIRE post
un-snipped since that seems to be a point of contention with you. Are we
just a bit passive-aggressive?

I have an ego. I'm not humble... but that's because I don't have anything to
be humble about. But Holy Hanna, you out-do me by a furlong and a half. I
may be self-absorbed but you raise it to a religion. I don't know why you
think you are so terrific and that I'm dirt, but hey, if it floats your
boat, then keep on sailing.

Maybe you have a long history of great accomplishments... maybe you are a
successful businessman, or a syndicated writer, or you're a movie star. But
I honestly have no idea where you are coming from. All I see from you is
ego-centricism wrapped in the well-worn Slackware shroud of intolerance.

I do give you credit for not posting under a cloak, but that's about all I
can give you credit for.

All you had to say was "Al, I respectfully disagree with you." But no. You
can't do that.... I guess because that would not curry favor with Dan C.
and the rest of the dog pack... a group it seems to me you are hoping to
curry favor with. Your privilege. You are not alone here.

You're like Melissa. You write a lot of words and don't say much of
anything. That works well in her academic world, but I'm not sure it works
so well here.

I give you credit for one thing, and one thing only. You didn't call me a
troll. That will cost you with the dog pack, but to me it showed a spark or
independence and just a bit of courage.

It's apropos that the word 'courage' be used. Who dares have the courage to
speak up against Dan, 'ken', Hicks, Melissa, Grant, Faux, nb, you, and the
rest of the wild pack of dogs that seek to run this group? Just me and rm?
Well so be it then.

If you want to debate market share or the economics of Linux, fine. I'm your
guy. But do me a favor and try to execute just a bit of editorial control.
You write like a high school senior... all over the place, not quite
knowing what your point is. No one can understand it, and no one wants to
try.

anc

ANC wrote:

> Jeez, Louise William. That was about the greatest crock of crap posting
> that has been on this group in I don't know how long.

Since your last post, perhaps?

> I have an ego. I'm not humble...

No shit.

> but that's because I don't have anything
> to be humble about.

Don't worry. The universe has a way of correcting this defect.

> You're like Melissa. You write a lot of words and don't say much of
> anything. That works well in her academic world, but I'm not sure it works
> so well here.

Good. Never forget to insult Melissa, Chew Toy.

>
> I give you credit for one thing, and one thing only. You didn't call me a
> troll. That will cost you with the dog pack, but to me it showed a spark
> or independence and just a bit of courage.

But you are a troll. You started this thread with nothing but trolling on
your mind.

> It's apropos that the word 'courage' be used. Who dares have the courage
> to speak up against Dan, 'ken', Hicks, Melissa, Grant, Faux, nb, you, and
> the rest of the wild pack of dogs that seek to run this group? Just me and
> rm? Well so be it then.

You and Roger are both so special! Your mommies must be so proud!

> If you want to debate market share or the economics of Linux, fine. I'm
> your guy. But do me a favor and try to execute just a bit of editorial
> control. You write like a high school senior... all over the place, not
> quite knowing what your point is. No one can understand it, and no one
> wants to try.

Speak for yourself. I understood it perfectly. Since you missed it, here
is the point again:

"I can only conclude that the ANC package of feigned persecution and
scattered insult is the whole entire part and parcel of the ANC message,
such that everything else is merely a vehicle used to carry the
ANC package." (William Hunt)

--
Old Man

On 2006-04-01, Old Man <bill@witch.lan> wrote:

>
> Speak for yourself. I understood it perfectly. Since you missed it, here
> is the point again:

So did everyone else in the western world. Unfortunately, Mr Hunt failed to
post the message in mono syllables for Fluffy's benefit.

ken

Le Sat, 01 Apr 2006 18:08:26 +0000, No_One a écrit*:

> On 2006-04-01, Old Man <bill@witch.lan> wrote:
>
>>
>> Speak for yourself. I understood it perfectly. Since you missed it, here
>> is the point again:
>
> So did everyone else in the western world. Unfortunately, Mr Hunt failed to
> post the message in mono syllables for Fluffy's benefit.
>

Well, you missed one of (manies) Aristotle's points he wrote, last
week or so, in "Topics", but let's have a small excerpt from the
end of last book :
---->>
Do not argue with every one, nor practise upon the man in the street: for
there are some people with whom any argument is bound to degenerate. For
against any one who is ready to try all means in order to seem not to be
beaten, it is indeed fair to try all means of bringing about one's
conclusion: but it is not good form. Wherefore the best rule is, not
lightly to engage with casual acquaintances, or bad argument is sure to
result. For you see how in practising together people cannot refrain from
contentious argument.
<<-----

Now, of course, I also hear that, a few days ago, Schopenhauer made out
a funny contraption of the "Topics" which could even be easier to read
and apply to a market-shared-[doomed] world ;D)

PS: for people in a hurry, what little Arthur wrote is called:
"The Art of Always Being Right:
Thirty Eight Ways to Win When You Are Defeated
"

On Sat, 01 Apr 2006 20:42:46 +0200, Loki Harfagr <loki@DarkDesign.free.fr> wrote:

>Do not argue with every one, nor practise upon the man in the street: for
....

IOW: Don't argue with idiot dimwits, for they drag you down to their
level and try to beat you with experience.

Grant.
--
Momento mori ( remember that you must die... )

On 2006-04-01, Grant <bugsplatter@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 01 Apr 2006 20:42:46 +0200, Loki Harfagr <loki@DarkDesign.free.fr> wrote:
>
>>Do not argue with every one, nor practise upon the man in the street: for
> ...
>
> IOW: Don't argue with idiot dimwits, for they drag you down to their
> level and try to beat you with experience.


The problem is that you cannot prove yourself
against someone who is much weaker than yourself.
They are in a lose/lose situation. If you are
strong and fighting the weak, then if you kill
your opponent then you are a scoundrel... if you
let him kill you, then you are an idiot. So here
is a dilemma which others have suffered before us,
and for which as far as I can see there is simply
no escape. -- Martin van Creveld

--

http://rlworkman.net