A Death Threat From A Puppy Linux Supporter

by Caitlyn Martin

I've just been informed by e-mail that not only are some defenders of Puppy Linux flaming me on the new DistroWatch Weekly comments but one actually issued a death threat against me for being "negative" about his or her favorite distribution in a recent post here on O'ReillyNet. It's one thing for a distribution to be well liked and inspire loyalty. It is something very different indeed to threaten the life of someone who disagrees. The point of my post which so outraged this person was that I couldn't review Puppy Linux because the distro won't run on my laptops.

If you're curious about the threat see post #90 on DistroWatch Weekly's comments. I have not responded there and I will not. I also won't back down or be intimidated and I stand behind my previous post.

This is a public appeal to Barry Kauler and the Puppy Linux user community to speak up against anyone who would resort to threats of violence to defend their distro. Indeed, I'd like to see some of that community speak up against the personal attacks on me in general. Do you believe there should be "hell to pay" (quoting post #90 again) if
someone has a bad experience with Puppy Linux and reports on it?

Digg It!

49 Comments

Oli
2007-10-08 16:10:07
I've read the thread and studied the comment a few times. I can't see the threat. I agree they shouldn't be giving you any grief but what's actually written doesn't seem all *that* offensive (to me).


Are you sure you're not reading too far into it?

tlt
2007-10-08 16:30:03
I'd have to agree. The writing quality by that poster was extremely poor - attempting to be eloquent but coming off as quasi-coherent rambling. From what I could glean, the poster wasn't personally threatening Ms. Martin about Puppy Linux. Rather it was some reference to 'political writings' and a rather tasteless comment about offending the wrong people. More like "if you keep teasing that dog, he'll bite" rather than a direct death threat. Still in EXTREMELY poor taste, but one would have to be pretty paranoid to let that comment cause any loss of sleep.
Shawn
2007-10-08 16:35:07
Yes, but we have to keep that whole fiasco with Kathy Sierra in mind, too.
lar
2007-10-08 17:03:07
Well it looks like a threat to me, with a failed attempt to be subtle about it in the last 2 lines. Sadly, the Linux culture is still openly hostile to women, at least those who dare to express and defend their opinion. You can also find insulting remarks regarding Ms. Martin's gender in some of the attacking posts from this week and last week.
CRG
2007-10-08 17:26:17
Hmm.... some people seem to make up stuff to help their (not-going-as-they-hoped) careers.... This certainly seems to be at play here. Sensationalism over professional objectivism yet again.... why I am I not surprised?
Charles
2007-10-08 17:29:16
I think it comes off fairly threatening. Writing ability isn't really an excuse. If you can write enough in any language to make passing threats, it is likely you are being intentionally menacing. Fortunately, some people were speaking up in the comments, but it is difficult for a community to moderate trash in its forums unless the community has some ability to mark comments as objectionable or off topic. Also, I think the standard we set for other people's behavior should be a bit higher then trying to decide whether it shouldn't "cause any loss of sleep." :)
ZuluTango
2007-10-08 17:31:00
Poorly worded rambling comments. Not much more than that. You really have to consider the source as these distros attract all age groups and levels of social intelligence.
W. Davis
2007-10-08 17:54:03
Whatever the actual intent, the so-called puppies have succeeded in deterring me from their distro. If that's the kind of 'community' they have, they can keep it.
Caitlyn Martin
2007-10-08 18:51:04
When I was alerted to what was going on I read what was on DistroWatch. My very first reaction was to not take it terribly seriously. Then a friend pointed out that there are so many crazies in the world that I can't assume that it isn't a real threat. I was advised to call the FBI. I might just do that.


No, I'm not making it up. My career is just fine, thankyouverymuch. Anyone who defends this is defending the indefensible. Anyone can read what was posted. Yes, there was plenty of sexism and plenty of personal attacks. Those I can ignore. A death threat cannot be ignored even if my gut feeling is that it is an empty threat. You never really know, do you?

James
2007-10-08 19:02:00
One note. Yes I read your original post and your writing style can be seen as somewhat abrasive. Critique aside. I just pulled puppy off of a number of older laptops and went with DSL. I won't shop at Home Depot either. Republican style death threats are not a laughing matter. Period.
Raffy
2007-10-08 19:02:28
Reviews are useful but any Linux distro can live without it, as the users are free to test and see it for themselves (see http://puppylinux.org ). So I find it strange that any serious Linux user will go so far as to do what you're suggesting.


That poster could simply be a troll wishing to harm whatever he fancies, so why give it any sense of credibility by writing about it?


The Puppy Linux community has beed consistently described as a friendly community, and this association with an anonymous poster is doing the community an injustice.

ketz
2007-10-08 19:24:02
Truly, coming from the group of people who like to rationalize monikers like "M$" and "Windoze", the term "open sores" is quite appropriate. This is what happens when you turn technology into a religion.
tlt
2007-10-08 20:12:26
Do whatever you think is necessary. Calling the FBI sounds like a great idea.
Serenitude
2007-10-08 23:43:47
This distro fanaticism does more damage to FOSS than any Microsoft FUD could possibly hope to do.


It's also the reason many who try Linux eventually are driven back to Windows.


It's also inexcusable, and absurd, to threaten the well-being of someone who had a negative experience with your distro of choice. A full and unreserved apology is not only in order, but I would think mandatory. Distro-terrorism will make sure Linux doesn't grow, if Microsoft fails. Again, the Linux community turns out to be it's own worst enemy :(


Serenitude - Proud Linux User

Anonymous Coward
2007-10-09 00:30:36
You know, for all I care I could call myself as "Caitlin Martin #1 fan" and promise to put an end to Barry as revenge to your threat. Does it mean you (or your employer, or your other fanboys, your reader community, etc) will be responsible for my action? Do you have the responsibility to speak up against me?


The threat-poster action is condemnable. Your response to it is a laughing matter - that shows your quality as a journalist.

xvalentinex
2007-10-09 00:32:49
Allow me to translate for the poor communication in Post #90, or my take on it anyway. Don't get me wrong I'm not defending this ignoramus or Puppy Linux (never tried, looks interesting though). However, I think you are a little quick to jump on the FBI wagon. I added a few quips for comedic relief.


Hi Roadie,


I am not a Puppy Linux user, however three different versions booted successfully on my hardware. My only real intent of running Puppy was to try out the "Live" version and see if it met my standards of a small Linux distro.


Turns out, that it was actually useful. Having it nearby helped me quickly troubleshoot whether my recent Internet issues were related to my OS, Hardware, or ISP.


The problem turned out to be a 9-yr old router (probably USRobotics, but was so old I couldn't tell, hell maybe it was my rusty 10base2 connection). After a week, I lost Internet again! However, this time it was my ISP. Both times Puppy booted right up without any confusing settings to mess with.


With Puppy, the user has the ability to restart network services which are usually preset (or I just don't know how to access).


I normally wouldn't argue with what I feel is an uninformed review, but there were what I felt to be more broad insults about Linux.


It shows that Puppy is useful and her publications are self promoting with political rantings. I believe she will probably be fired soon if she keeps it up.


It is obvious through your political rantings that you are an extreme republican. [reference book "DEAD Right"].


Do I need to elaborate on how Republicans are killing the Anarchist movement?

BillWho?
2007-10-09 02:28:17
If this is a threat then it is the last thing Linux as a total needs. Should there be "Hell to pay"? Yes for creeps like this! I am a happy Puppy user who is sorry that Caitlyn was unable to enjoy the distro the way I do, but then I'm sure that some of the distro's that float her boat wont float mine. The only thing in that post I am glad about was the second line.
"quote"90 • EOF (post # 85) (by Anonymous on 2007-10-08 20:27:44 GMT from Canada)
HI Roadie -


Not even being a Puppy user

Fair enough ? "endquote"


No its not bloody fair enough!

Nuno
2007-10-09 04:34:03
Give me a break, Caitlyn, at your age and position, not being able to distinguish between a transitional loss of temper and a death threat is simply gross. As we use to say where i am from, "such things only happen in the US" :) You really have no idea how a death threat looks like. Overseas we already assume that Jesusland is sinking into collective and individual paranoia, but this is a bit too much, frankly.
If you consider that sterile verbatim to threaten your life, you should read through flamewar threads we use to launch overhere (Spain). According to your understanding of a death threat, we would be all in court by now.
Finally, I have no affiliation with Puppy whatsoever and i don't like Kauler's licensing policies. However, it is a peculiar little distro to cuddle pet around once in a while :)
fohgeddabawdit
2007-10-09 05:57:07
Heh, I recognize that writing style from another forum. Senseless rambler and fight-picker. I learned to ignore this one a long time ago.
Nuno
2007-10-09 07:57:51
Oh damn... Soon i'll be nicknamed after Russell Crowe :) (private reference for Southpark diehards;))
If to tell things straight is picking a fight... I guess you guys on that side of the pond are just too unused to debate. That's why we have reached the current state of affairs...
Better "senseless rambler" than hypocritical politeness.

2007-10-09 08:30:23
"Yes, there was plenty of sexism and plenty of personal attacks."


What!? The DEAD Right, maybe, but just about as much sexism as you seem to have found in Linux Journal. Get off your high horse and join us back on the planet Earth when you get a chance.

Thomas Holbrook Ii
2007-10-09 10:14:09
First of all, I fail to see how what the individual in question said could be construed as a death threat. Second of all, this individual stated that they were not a regular Puppy Linux user and have only tried it a few times and that was it. How could this person be defined as a Puppy Linux supporter if they are not a regular user of said distribution?
Ptero-4
2007-10-09 10:41:52
Catlyn. You shouldn't worry about that threat. I have been using linux (Currently Mint) and visiting linux forums and irc channels since some years ago and while linux advocates tend to be pretty vocal and violent they only direct their violence towards M$ and their known puppets (some PC and hardware makers that are in bed with M$), having one linux fanboy threaten anyone not related to M$ is unusual and the few ones that do usually fade away silently after.
Landor
2007-10-09 12:36:16

Her FBI "THREAT" should be taken very sersiously, just as seriously as a time when someone in a debate years ago told me that they were going to get their BF who works for the "Australian FBI" (lmao) to investigate me and I said, well, it wouldn't work, even though the vehicle would be unmarked, the roo pouch they were doing surveilance in would be a dead give-away.


So I'm going to tell the person that she THREATENED with the FBI to call in Rock and Bullwinkle!


Keep your stick on the ice...


Landor


2007-10-09 12:58:32
Raffy writes: "The Puppy Linux community has been consistently described as a friendly community...."


Really? Even after all the personal attacks that you and others have made in the comments section of Distrowatch Weekly? And that's not to mention the things you all say in the murga-linux Puppy forum when you think no-one else is watching.

Warsteiner
2007-10-09 15:35:13
Hypocrisy... Whether a threat was blatantly stated or implied through prose it was an opinion protected by free speech. Last time I checked the Linux community was based on this principal of freedom . The bully in the yard looks big and threatening, but to stifle him would be a violation of all that we stand for. Linux/Amerika... don't succumb to this tyranny of perceived loss of control.
wirechief
2007-10-09 15:57:47
flamming is one thing but personal threats have no place on any blog, forum or any public blog. If you don't cant respond
intelligently you shouldn't reply.
Shawn
2007-10-09 16:08:38
Whether a threat was blatantly stated or implied through prose it was an opinion protected by free speech...


If it was a blatant threat, then it isn't protected under the First Amendment.

ohmy
2007-10-09 16:32:27
Anonymous said: "..personal attacks that you and others have made in the comments section of Distrowatch Weekly?"


I was reading that long page, but I only saw facts and some fun. If people there made fun of Caitlyn, then perhaps she deserves it.


Here is a good reflection from Landor that Caitlyn may want to remember (see #146):


"Speaking of groupies, and bring this back to Linux. Although I have found that the normal exuberance? related to their distro uncalled for, I have changed my thoughts on the mattter. Without said dedication to Linux in general it wouldn't be where it is today. Without those promoting it even zealously it would be left to those like myself who just tell people about it, try once to get them to take a peek, then leave it at that. I don't think in that case it would've evolved into what it has.


So for those who have been called zealots, fanatics, fanbois, touters, we probably wouldn't be where we are with you, just as much as Linus and the Devs."


2007-10-09 17:24:49
Anyone saying they don't see a threat in that post is a troll. Period.
Landor
2007-10-09 17:57:31
Anyone who cannot realize the comment was used as reference to a book titled "DEAD right" a troll and obviously not very well read.


One insane and unread reader of DWW's Comments section runs off at the fingertips and the like masses join the march to ignorance. No wonder they read this blog.


Keep your stick on the ice...


Landor


Caitlyn Martin
2007-10-10 07:51:02
Death threats are not protected free speech in any modern, civilized country. An innocent person has nothing to fear if someone who feels they were threatened calls law enforcement. Calling the FBI is not a "threat". It is a reasonable precaution.


I still find it hysterically funny when people attack me as a "journalist". I am not a journalist and never have been. I am a Linux user and Linux professional (meaning I get paid to support and secure the OS) and I write a blog about my experiences with Linux and the Linux community. Blogging is not journalism. I've been attacked and threatened for posting MY OPINION, clearly labeled as such, in a blog.


@Landor: First, you will not get to dominate the discussion here as you try to do on DWW by posting endlessly. Second, I didn't praise the security of Vector Linux. If you read all I've said about Vector you know I called it a distro in transition. I also said it has a long way to go in terms of security but that by taking on paid support clients they would have to improve the situation. I also pointed out that Vector, like Sidux, has an alternative mechanism in place for sending out security updates. The problem with Vector Linux and security is not that they don't have a mechanism (which was what Ladislav's criteria were based on) but that they don't use it properly. You can twist my words all you want but I never claimed Vector Linux has security down.


My favorite distro? That seems to change all the time. For personal use it was Fedora once upon a time, then Xubuntu, then Vector Linux, and now Wolvix. For business use it's been Red Hat/CentOS for a very long time.


Fanaticism is blind, religious belief in something. I don't think zealotry or fanaticism EVER serve the Linux community well.


"Having fun" or slinging mud or personal attacks are one thing. A death threat is something again and clearly I am not the only one who saw this as threatening. Nothing anyone can post or say can change the fact that, as a number of people have pointed out, this reflects very poorly indeed on Puppy Linux and the Linux community as a whole. The fact that the Puppy Linux user community hasn't condemned this makes matters worse.


@W. Davis: You're feelings and mine are essentially the same. I had nothing against Puppy when I wrote the previous article other than the simple fact that it didn't run on systems where every other distro I tried save Austrumi worked just fine. I downloaded the latest version to try. The 'community' around Puppy has turned me off to the point that I really now do have a reason to avoid that distro.


Once again, anyone who defends the threat or attacks me for reacting to a death threat is defending the indefensible.

Caitlyn Martin
2007-10-10 08:18:21
@Anonymous: "Anyone saying they don't see a threat in that post is a troll. Period."


Not a troll, just willfully blind. They are so hung up in attacking me and proving me wrong that they ignore what the content might look like particularly to someone who has never read or heard of a book called "Dead Right". Somebody can be very well read indeed and not have heard of one political book. Coming after the "hell to pay" comment I agree with you that there is no way this can be seen as anything other than a threat.

Caitlyn Martin
2007-10-10 08:34:20
I wasn't online yesterday and going through the e-mail notifications for comments on this thread I see that one of the O'Reilly blog editors cleaned things up and deleted some really nasty ones. A public thank you for that! Some of us have a life and can't watch the postings 24x7.
Wow
2007-10-10 10:41:18
Death Threats are not to be tolerated that is agreed, and I am in no way defending the "Death Threat", BUT (theres always a BUT) the nature of this "Death Threat" is not what it is being made out to be. It also does not come from "Puppy Linux" or a "Puppy Linux Supporter".


What? How can that be? Stay with me here.
1) #90's first sentence states

Not even being a Puppy user (3 versions did boot& work as intended)

and also
It did subsequently prove useful (it was close @ hand out of several options) to trouble-shoot whether, it was an O/Sys, hardware or ISP problem > when suddenly& recently, WEB access.was lost.


Now read that first part again but replace the name of your favorite distro in place of "Puppy". Then you tell me whether YOU would count this person as part of YOUR favorite distro's "community".


2) Furthur down #90 says

Besides, it serves notice - if she wishes to continue in her vanities - Esp. RE published political rantings : There WILL be hell to pay, (not from me) = who needs yet more terrorist 'justifications" to worry about ?


There truly is such a thing as being "DEAD right" !


Please note the "Esp. RE published political rantings" Which is followed by the "Death Threat".


Why is this "Death Threat" being put towards Puppy when the context of the message clearly shows it was in reference to Ms. Martins' "political rantings"?


My own answer to the above would be that there seems to be some ulterior motives here. Note that Ms. Martin seems to be getting all her experience with the Puppy Linux community second hand. She contacted Mark South but she didn't report getting the other side from John Murga, Puppy forum mods, or even Barry K. himself?



As a side note here are a few definitions from www.merriam-webster.com

blog = Etymology: short for Weblog
: a Web site that contains an online personal journal with reflections, comments, and often hyperlinks provided by the writer


Hmm, keeping an "online personal journal" Well then...


journal = 1 a : a record of current transactions; especially : a book of original entry in double-entry bookkeeping b : an account of day-to-day events c : a record of experiences, ideas, or reflections kept regularly for private use d : a record of transactions kept by a deliberative or legislative body e : LOG 3 f : LOG 4
2 a : a daily newspaper b : a periodical dealing especially with matters of current interest
3 : the part of a rotating shaft, axle, roll, or spindle that turns in a bearing


Caitlyn you may not be Connie Chung, you don't get paid for it, but yes you are a journalist.

Caitlyn Martin
2007-10-10 11:17:04
@Wow: The anonymous poster who made the death threat was posting in support of those attacking me for saying something negative about Puppy Linux. I did not call him a Puppy Linux regular user or a Puppy Linux developer. I called him a "supporter" since he is posting in support of Puppy Linux. Clear enough?


Do you really have to trot out dictionary definitions to try and equate my opinions with professional journalism? I suppose I should be flattered. I still think you are entirely wrong but I suppose it's a complement that you give so much weight to my opinions. However, since I clearly labeled the original article as "opinion" it seems I am not confusing it with news or irrefutable fact. It's more like an editorial, isn't it?


Finally, my experience with Puppy is first hand. I wrote clearly that it failed to install on five or my laptops (four different models) and DID install on one old desktop. I wrote clearly that I had tried multiple versions. I also don't need Mark South's article to form my opinion of the Puppy Linux community. The attacks on me are the basis of my opinion although I will say that Mark South's article seems kind to me by comparison to my own feelings now -- feelings based on first hand negative experience.


Nitpick all you want. Nothing can justify a death threat.

Dougal
2007-10-10 12:42:22
A bit of irony here:
The "Puppy enthusiast" who made the "death threat" is in fact Gn2, a.k.a. the-only-person-ever-to-be-banned-from the Puppy Linux Forum.
Further, in the little I bothered to read from his DWW comments I noticed he actually mentioned how he "booted Puppy about three times" when he was trying to create a bootable CD, which quite clearly indicates he is not a Puppy user (and he never was, which is why he used to give people wrong advice on the Puppy forum, not being acquainted with Puppy's structure -- it is no secret that he is an avid Gentoo users).


Concerning the "death threat", it is possible to read anything your mind fancies in his comments, since his "style" of writing is so bizarre that no-one has any idea what the hell he's talking about half of the time.


As for sexism, the only cases I've encountered recently in FLOSS circles are right here on O'Reilley, in the stupid series of articles entitled "Women in Technology".
If I wanted to read about "inspiring" "tech" women, I'd go to Val Henson's home page -- she's intelligent, witty **and** can code in C. Right now I'd rather read JimGoad.com.

Jeremiah Foster
2007-10-10 14:23:00
Frankly I think those who try and rationalize away the threat made to Caitlyn are complicit in the threat itself. The IT community in general is overloaded with testosterone and ego, maybe that is one of the reasons why so few women are interested in being part of it. To blame the victim of the threat by essentially saying "I've seen worse flames" or "that isn't a threat" is to tolerate the culture of insult and ridicule that is so many web forums.


I think that person who made those obvious threats is not well, their turgid prose and odd punctuation seem almost diagnosable. And Caitlyn is right to take that seriously. Furthermore, we should all be condemning that post as something we will not tolerate, not equivocating or appeasing those who threaten.


It is a threat, that threat is wrong, and Caitlyn is right to say so.

Raffy
2007-10-10 17:14:06
OK, now that Dougal has mentioned it, would you or one of the editors be so kind as to remove that "Puppy Linux Supporter" from the title of this article?


How is Dougal able to identify the person? Inevitably, the next question would be, "How is Ms Caitlyn able to identify poster #90 as the same person hounding her in her blog?"


Dougal can easily refer to facts, see the links below:


Gn2 was banned from the forum (the first, and only one so far):
http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?mode=quote&p=117861#117861


Search for Gn2's posts in the forum:
http://murga-linux.com/puppy/search.php?search_author=Gn2


I feel sad mentioning these here, but even sadder that Caitlyn (or her editors) could not appreciate the ABSENCE of any relationship between poster #90 and the Puppy Linux community.


Ms Caitlyn, you asked that the Puppy Linux regulars help you out, so here are some of the facts as written by Dougal and me. I hope that you will see this as a friendly gesture from the Puppy Linux community.


My last appeal for you is to communicate directly with the community by posting in the forum, should you have any more concerns. After all, we share the same belief in solving problems rather than creating them.

Caitlyn Martin
2007-10-11 08:37:20
@Dougal & @Raffy: I don't know how you have identified the person who made the death threat but I certainly have no way of identifying him. I also have never claimed that he is the same person as ShakaZ, the Puppy supporter who spammed my blog. The two are separate issues only tied together by one thing: support of Puupy Linux.


I will repeat myself to make the point you want to ignore: the anonymous poster who made the death threat (I have no way of knowing if he is gn2 or not) was posting in support of those attacking me for saying something negative about Puppy Linux. I did not call him a Puppy Linux regular user or a Puppy Linux developer. I called him a "supporter" since he is posting in support of Puppy Linux. Clear enough?


Dougal denies that it's a death threat yet numerous readers have seen it as just that. I still do no matter how awful the anonymous poster's writing style.


Finally, to Raffy: You have already been turned down by the O'Reilly Media editors and I will turn you down as well. I looked at the Puppy forum and yes, you've banned one person who may or may not be the right person. John Murga also stated that anyone who makes death threats will be banned. Good. However, he makes that statement as the opening of a long personal attack on me.


What you completely fail to realize is that the response to my original posting about being unable to get Puppy to boot on five laptops (four different models, two different manufacturers) was quite civil for the first couple of days. The personal attacks on me started after my article was linked in the Puppy Linux forum. At that point I still said I was willing to try Puppy 3.00 and report the results honestly. This could have worked out as positive publicity for Puppy instead of negative until your community went after me relentlessly. Heck, I didn't even post on this week's DistroWatch Weekly and yet attacks were launched there culminating in a death threat.


What I see is the Puppy Linux community circling the wagons. Instead of admitting there is a problem in your community you try to discredit me and pour derision on me as a community. I think whatever negative publicity you receive at the moment is richly deserved. You don't disown the attacks on me. You encourage them. You half-heartedly disown the death threat and agree that death threats are unacceptable while encouraging more of any other sort of attack on me.


There is something seriously wrong with the Puppy Linux community. Until that community and the Puppy developers realize that and publicly call for change this article will not be changed.


Having said all of that here is as much of an olive branch as I am willing to offer at this time: if I see some truly positive changes in the response of the Puppy Linux community I will promise you to honestly report them as well. I'll even agree to finally try Puppy Linux 3.00 and if it works like other distros do -- as in it boots on my hardware -- I will give it a fair review. However, before I even consider censoring my articles which accurately reflect my experiences I think your community will also have to do a great deal of self-censorship.

BillWho?
2007-10-12 02:02:41
@Caitlyn Martin The fact that the Puppy Linux user community hasn't condemned this makes matters worse.


Please reread my earlier post, I did condemn this whole attack although I do admit this may not have been truly obvious in the way that I stated it. I believe that several of the other posts from members of the Puppy community also condemn this attack while at the same time trying to defend Puppy and "muddying the water" causing a breakdown of understanding on both sides.

Caitlyn Martin
2007-10-12 08:51:07
This morning I deleted a bunch of personal attacks from the comments or from the pending comments which were caught by the junk filter. One accused me of "fanning the flames" before launching into unacceptable material. The fact that some think the appropriate response to my post is to dismiss the threat and launch into a new personal round of attacks on me speaks volumes. It says more about the Puppy Linux community and a (hopefully) very small but truly unfortunate element in the Linux community as a whole than anything I could ever write.


@BillWho? I accept what you say and appreciate it. Unfortunately a lot of people in your community seem to have a very different attitude.

Grobsch
2007-10-12 17:04:27
In every blog, site or forum related to Linux these days I visited, I found some war of words... I really do not understand... Only developers can politely complain about reviews and I would like to consider they will never attack an opinion... Inside the open source spirit must reside democracy, peaceful values and the freedom of speech.
Zeppy
2007-10-12 22:36:39
Wow---those aren't exactly the kind of emotions you usually associate with the word "puppy," are they? Maybe that guy should be using Attack Dog Linux. :?P
fauigerzigerk
2007-10-14 05:48:14
Caitlyn, I've read the comment you refer to and I think it is clearly intended to be threatening. The wording is not an accident. If this is a one off I wouldn't be too scared though, as that guy's anger seems to be related more to that particular matter than to your person in general. It can't hurt to ask to the police to look into it, if only to deter such behaviour in the future.


And to Nuno let me say this: Language like that is NOT normal or acceptable anywhere in the world. I am european as well and I've been involved in very heated online debates for ages. To make this affair into some kind of anti american proxy war is a pathetic example of utterly distorted priorities.

ShakaZ
2007-10-14 11:19:13
Funny how all the messages that show how stupid your claims are get deleted & how you clamp to your "dead threat" phantasm stronger and stronger as the comments flow in... though i'm quite sure you very well know there's no ground to it.
I hear they are using the same tactics in totalitarian regimes, and lately in the usa, to better control the population.


Welcome to 1984...
(for the lobotomized Caitlyn followers out there : no i'm not speaking of time travel)


*************** deleted message n°2 - edition n°4 ******************
Junk filter... yeah right, I wonder how your messages manage to pass through?


Just in case here's "unacceptable material" from earlier, my dead... oops my dear.. wow another death threat just slipped by... sure babe, whatever it takes to gain popularity, maybe you ought to be in the politics instead with your strong taste for reactionary revisionism


**************** deleted message - edition n°5 *******************
Good job Caitlyn, continue feeding the flames with non-existent crap... you're about to set a new standard with your more than questionable journalistic "skills".
Don't forget to delete this message as you can't stand the critic, my dear...

Caitlyn Martin
2007-10-14 18:53:27
Everyone, meet ShakaZ. He is the reason I closed the comments on my previous article thread after he tried to post the same attack on me a dozen times or more. I have a life so I can't be online 24x7 so he managed to get this post in maybe 10 minutes after I deleted his last one. He's tried to post the second half of this five times in the past 24 hours. Textbook obsessive behavior, IMHO. Does anyone wonder why I called him a fanatic and a zealot?


@ShakaZ: This blog is published by Movable Type. Askismet does analyze each and every message. Depending on the rating it either publishes (as in your last post), holds for moderation, or junks a comment. Sorry to tell you that I'm not lying and that some comments on both of my last two posts were either held for moderation or junked.


The reason the only posts that showed up in the last 24 hours support my position is because they have been the ONLY comments I've received save the five by you.


What you fail to understand is this is my blog, not yours. I have the right to moderate it as I see fit. I've allowed all of the negative or critical comments except those, like yours, who dismiss my entire two articles and instead launch into personal attacks. Your method of trying to prove me wrong is to accuse me of lying and, of course, anyone who agrees with me must be "lobotomized" or stupid. Do you really think you'll change people's minds by insulting them?


I have no idea what the intention of the death threat was. I've said that repeatedly. A number of commenters here, on LXer.com, and on Digg saw it as I did: as an unquestionably threatening post.


Anyway, I've decided to let your latest post through because you do such a professional job of taking all the rope I've handed you and using it. Congratulations!

ed
2007-10-15 08:22:46
Your reading comprehension is lacking.
Caitlyn Martin
2007-10-15 13:05:29
I'm closing comments here too. The Puppy Linux fanatic from Belgium, ShakaZ, is reposting the same comment I deleted within minutes of each deletion over and over again. He needs professional help, IMHO. Such obsession is really sad, isn't it?