Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 16th Dec 2009 00:13 UTC
Gnome In the item we ran yesterday about GNOME and the GNU Project, one aspect got snowed under a little bit. It turns out a claim made in the iTWire article about the role a blog post by Miguel De Icaza was false, and even though the claim wasn't ours, I did repeat it, and therefore, should correct it too. I also need to offer apologies for not framing the opening of the article clear enough - had I framed it better, a lot of pointless discussion and name-calling could've been avoided.
Thread beginning with comment 399980
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: Be very careful
by koki on Wed 16th Dec 2009 21:35 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Be very careful"
koki
Member since:
2005-10-17

"This is OSNews, a news site, not a blog.


Thank you, for informing us, longtime owners and editors of this site, what our own site is.
"

Well, you were the one who said that you were just blogging... So, perhaps you could change your title to Managing Blogging Editor? Stupid jokes aside, you can't portray yourself as the managing editor of a news site and then conveniently claim to be just a blogger when the potatoes burn. It's kind of mis-portraying yourself.

My comment about the (good) old days was more related to OSNews now having a different balance in the types of news; I just feel there is too much legal stuff and/or "you said this, no I said that" soap opera posts now, and a lot less exciting stuff about the actual technology and the people that make such technology happen.

I don't argue that there may have been more syndicated content in the past; but while many news posts are definitely longer now than the past syndicated posts, the added volume is in many cases a rehash of information existing elsewhere -- including verbatim quotes -- which IMO add little informational value.

In the bigger picture, OSNews seemed to have more actual hands-on reviews and definitely more interviews of people in technology (5 in 2009, 4 in 2008, 9 in 2007, 11 in 2006, 14 in 2005...), and that is what I used to find the most interesting.

Needless to say, this is all just my personal preference and you are free to totally ignore me. ;)

Reply Parent Score: 2