Repeat business is any company's lifeblood. I suggest we drain this lifeblood. If 30,000 people follow the steps below, IPIX will have no choice but to discontinue their legal harassment.
Step 1: Locate IPIX content. Find a large amount of IPIX content on the WWW or anywhere else you can find it, and select one piece at random. By "at random" I mean RANDOMLY, not arbitarily. Generate a random number with the computer, throw a dart, etc. If your random number is "1", go with the first hit - don't say, "That's not random" and generate a second number.
Step 2: Locate the person responsible for distributing the IPIX content you have selected. Be persistent. Unless that person has gone into the Witness Protection Program, it should be possible to locate him or her. It may be easy, or it may be hard, but it should be possible. If you fail, try harder. Hire a private detective if you must, and if you can afford to.
Step 3: Once you have found the IPIX content publisher, call and politely explain what IPIX is doing, and why you believe it is a bad thing. Don't harass. If the person asks you not to call them again, your job is done.
Step 4: Return to step one as necessary, but be careful not to contact the same person twice.
This is very important: don't do anything illegal. Finding a person, calling that person, and talking politely - none of these actions are illegal. Don't take it any further. There will be no need to.
Finally, keep up with the news. If IPIX capitulates to your satisfaction, stop. Vengeance is unbecoming. If they take action which is insufficient, let IPIX know what more they must do.
This is yet another good development in a site which is rapidly changing from a frustrating display of pettiness and stupidity into a remarkable meritocracy of ideas.
Unfortunately, however, the first thing I've learned from this new feature is that surprisingly few people know what the word "insightful" means. I see this tag being applied to many comments which are best described as "interesting".
Insight is the ability to understand the inner nature of a thing, or to gain an intuitive understanding of a situation. An insightful comment is one which reveals this understanding, and conveys it to others.
For example, if an editorial were posted which complained about the rise of bloated, slow applications, an insightful comment might explain why applications are larger and slower than they were several years ago. A comment which says, "I agree -- applications need to be smaller", would not be insightful.
The comment titled "'Redundant' selection on new moderator thingy" certainly raised an important point which deserved prominence, but there was certainly nothing insightful about it.
How can you say "Linux really could lose" without defining what you mean by losing?
What piece of software someone else uses in the privacy of their own home does not matter to me. I don't need commercial support, since I can write software for myself.
I'd say Linux hasn't lost anything as long as there are people writing patches for the kernel. Can you really imagine Linus Torvalds giving up on the project?
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, if you look at the dates, you'll notice that this is the Wired effect, not the Slashdot effect.
--
Dan
Apparently, there's just not enough lithium in the world.
Step 1: Locate IPIX content. Find a large amount of IPIX content on the WWW or anywhere else you can find it, and select one piece at random. By "at random" I mean RANDOMLY, not arbitarily. Generate a random number with the computer, throw a dart, etc. If your random number is "1", go with the first hit - don't say, "That's not random" and generate a second number.
Step 2: Locate the person responsible for distributing the IPIX content you have selected. Be persistent. Unless that person has gone into the Witness Protection Program, it should be possible to locate him or her. It may be easy, or it may be hard, but it should be possible. If you fail, try harder. Hire a private detective if you must, and if you can afford to.
Step 3: Once you have found the IPIX content publisher, call and politely explain what IPIX is doing, and why you believe it is a bad thing. Don't harass. If the person asks you not to call them again, your job is done.
Step 4: Return to step one as necessary, but be careful not to contact the same person twice.
This is very important: don't do anything illegal. Finding a person, calling that person, and talking politely - none of these actions are illegal. Don't take it any further. There will be no need to.
Finally, keep up with the news. If IPIX capitulates to your satisfaction, stop. Vengeance is unbecoming. If they take action which is insufficient, let IPIX know what more they must do.
This is yet another good development in a site which is rapidly changing from a frustrating display of pettiness and stupidity into a remarkable meritocracy of ideas.
Unfortunately, however, the first thing I've learned from this new feature is that surprisingly few people know what the word "insightful" means. I see this tag being applied to many comments which are best described as "interesting".
Insight is the ability to understand the inner nature of a thing, or to gain an intuitive understanding of a situation. An insightful comment is one which reveals this understanding, and conveys it to others.
For example, if an editorial were posted which complained about the rise of bloated, slow applications, an insightful comment might explain why applications are larger and slower than they were several years ago. A comment which says, "I agree -- applications need to be smaller", would not be insightful.
The comment titled "'Redundant' selection on new moderator thingy" certainly raised an important point which deserved prominence, but there was certainly nothing insightful about it.
How can you say "Linux really could lose" without defining what you mean by losing?
What piece of software someone else uses in the privacy of their own home does not matter to me. I don't need commercial support, since I can write software for myself.
I'd say Linux hasn't lost anything as long as there are people writing patches for the kernel. Can you really imagine Linus Torvalds giving up on the project?
--
Dan