OSNews

You're vastly overestimating the importance of comments made on OSNews - while I spend plenty of time here, I have no illusions that it's anything other than a pseudononymous virtual peanut gallery. This is hardly the New York Times or the Globe and Mail - nor their letters-to-the-editor pages.



Again, there's a difference between that and stating a fact without substantiation.

It also appears that you're making the nuance-free assumption that anyone who didn't vocally condemn yellowTAB was automatically a supporter, true-believer in the legality of their product, etc. I stuck with R5 and avoided purchasing ZETA precisely because of some of the reasons you mentioned (and the fact that the whole operation seemed consistently unprofessional in general) - but until the BitsOfNews post, there certainly wasn't anywhere near enough substantial evidence for rational adults to get out the pitchforks and light up their torches.



Eh? But there was apparently enough for you to make multiple self-congratulatory "I have overcome the slings and arrows - and by the way, I told you so" posts?



So your contention is... that absence of proof is proof of absence? Or are you just confusing evidence with proof?



Do you seriously believe that a meaningful parallel can be drawn between between working for a company with unsavoury business practices, and complicity in a regime that commited attempted-genocide and a laundry list of war crimes? The two acts - and their consequences - are so far removed from each other's league that any analogy between them is absurd, inflammatory hyperbole at best.



Oh please. "Censorship?" In what way have you been censored, or is that just a further delusion-of-persecution? I know it's a favourite passtime on OSNews to make obviously-inflammatory comments and then play the poor, set-upon victim when people respond in kind. But it's getting pretty tiresome.



That's an over-simplication which completely ignores context - and I also wasn't aware that the vast majority of people on the internet constituted a single culture.



If that was what you meant to communicate, then it would have been much more appropriate to simply state it that way. And there are certainly much, much more apt comparisons - once which don't include reference to groups primarily known for murdering millions of people (and aren't so inherently emotionally-loaded).



You know, people might treat your posts a little more seriously if you were capable of writing *at least* a single paragraph without including some little petty, infantile remark.



There's a difference between laws that are proscriptive rules and laws that are descriptive observations. Godwin's Law is of the latter type, you seem to be mistaking it for a law of the first type.



If you think that your intent justified making such an ignorant comparison, then you've pretty much proven my point about a stunning lack of intellectual context.



The only way that post could be described as a success is if your goal to demonstrate that you are unconcerned by silly little things like intellectually-consistent standards of argument.