Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!munnari.OZ.AU!news.mel.connect.com.au!news.mira.net.au!inquo!news.uoregon.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!zdc!szdc!szdc-e!news From: "John S. Dyson" <toor@dyson.iquest.net> Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.networking,comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Subject: Re: TCP latency Date: Tue, 16 Jul 1996 09:52:35 -0500 Organization: John S. Dyson's home machine Lines: 38 Message-ID: <31EBACB3.41C67EA6@dyson.iquest.net> References: <4paedl$4bm@engnews2.Eng.Sun.COM> <31E80ACA.167EB0E7@dyson.iquest.net> <4sadde$qsv@linux.cs.Helsinki.FI> <31E9E3A7.41C67EA6@dyson.iquest.net> <4seth1$2rt@dworkin.wustl.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: dyson.iquest.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0b5aGold (X11; I; FreeBSD 2.2-CURRENT i386) Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.os.linux.networking:45448 comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc:4080 comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:23759 Chuck Cranor wrote: > > In article <31E9E3A7.41C67EA6@dyson.iquest.net>, > John S. Dyson <toor@dyson.iquest.net> wrote: > >Look, jerk, you are continuing your > >stupid, infantile attack on me and FreeBSD. I really don't care about > >what you think. Secondly yours is the only response that made this > >allegation like you have. YOU ARE ALONE... > > >Linus, you are an arrogant, self-righteous a**hole... If I acted as stupid > >as you, I would also be as embarrased as you should be. I DEMAND > >a public apology. > > I fail to see the logic in publicly branding someone an asshole and > then demanding a public apology from them. In fact, it seems to me > you should be issuing an apology to the readers of these newsgroups > for lowering yourself to obscenity. Ick! > LIAR is an obsenity to me (in fact alot more severe than a**hole.) I apologize to the group for my language, but I cannot apologize to someone who calls me the worst name in the book, without justification. Lets understand the difference, the conclusion that I am a LIAR is dubious given the circumstances at hand. The behavior that allowed me to be called such is obvious and clear. My transgression (if any) had NO INTENT, but there was intent behind the name that I was called, and my response was a description of the persons behavior. Since I had not done anything wrong, what is the problem? Sorry, I was the one that was attacked. We are living more and more in a society where the victim can be prosecuted for his attempt to stop the perpetrator. John