#!CrunchBang 11 "Waldorf": The Breakfast of Champions

@Dietrich:

I can honestly say that I have never, ever come across such an offensive, self-aggrandising troll in all my many years of wandering the interwebs. I notice that you have neither responded to the comments from me nor the reasonable comments from caitlyn which actually go to the heart of your expressed opinions, yet you are bickering on like an embarrassed and cornered child to the others that are obviously baiting you.

You evidently have no intention of entering into any kind of reasoned discussion on what is quite an interesting and topical subject.

@Dietrich. The link is just a curt pointer to remind you of the fact that if you keep on stating Fedora is the revelation and every other distro is cr@p, then probably the Fedora forum will be the best place on earth for you, where all folks made the good decision. You strike me as the type of guy who walks into a Hells Angels bar explaining to everybody around that Harley Davidson is junk and that japanese motorcycles rule. And then you wonder why everybody feels so antagonistic and what all the fuss is about.

@_skelband

The 'reason' I didn't reply to you is that your remarks had 'nothing' to do with the story on which this thread is based: CrunchBang.

Please try to stay on topic and I will be happy to respond to you. Yes? Yes!

Thanks!

@awe poor poor Kiki what is troubling you?

C'est toujours la même chose? Tisk Tisk. C'est dommage.

Have some cookies and milk, perhaps. You'll feel better.

It's easy to let misspelled words slip in. You probably meant to say "C'est dommage".

@Dietrich. Get a life.

@kiki You get a life.

I continue providing thought leadership. :)

@penguinist

Typos? Happens all the time. Corrected, thanks.

> The 'reason' I didn't reply to you is that your remarks had 'nothing' to do with the story on which this thread is based: CrunchBang.

@Dietrich

The subject of the thread is the guy who wrote the article, and not the article. Read the first post if you don't believe me.

You are totally offtopic. If you want to talk about your article, please open a new thread and don't disrupt this one. I am not interested in reading and talking about your irrelevant piece of work and your obscure website. Why would anybody want to read a CruchBang review written by a guy who never run CruchBang? Go try a scifi forum and give us a break.

@jazz

You are simply too funny. Much like pavlov's dog. You still refuse to accept that I have used CrunchBang, despite my supplying a thread 'to you' from Aug 30, 2012 sharing my experience with others.

Oh I just finished writing another great story:

"The Ubuntu FOSS Community: Merely Chumps on the Outside Looking In"

http://www.linuxadvocates.com/2013/06/the-ubuntu-foss-commun...

Pageviews are going thru the roof!

Please don't let me keep you from kvetching.

I'll keep providing the thought leadership.

I have no idea how you reviewed one year ago the CrunchBang version released in May 2013. You are a clown.

> Oh I just finished writing another great story:

Just be modest, as any other great man in history. Your great intelligence should be enough for you.

> Pageviews are going thru the roof!

You need to go and talk to your readers. I understand if you disappear for a few days. Go there and stay there! Anything important here, I'll call you.

@jazz

It was in beta. You are thicker than two two-by-fours nailed together.

You'd like me to go away? Bwahahahahahahahah.

ah. hem. decorum.

> It was in beta. You are thicker than two two-by-fours nailed together.

Sorry again, in August when you pretend you tested a beta there was no CrunchBang beta. CrunchBang 10 has been released on August 9, so you see, there was no CrunchBang 11 beta yet. So pathetic!

@jazz,

Semantics. It was CrunchBang Testing 20120806.

Right back atcha.

If it was testing version 20120806 sometime in August last year, why did you pretend you tested this year in May the version released this year in May??? I am trying hard to be polite here and "clown" is the mildest label I can put on you.

Just to be on the record, I believe you didn't test sh*t! You have no idea how CrunchBang looks like, you didn't even notice it is based on Debian.

Do you want to talk about your LXC article? If it is too embarrassing for you maybe some other time? I heard you are an expert in systemd! Really?

Have some cookies and milk while you read the story junior.

"Just to be on the record, I believe you didn't test sh*t! You have no idea how CrunchBang looks like, you didn't even notice it is based on Debian."

Wow. I so appreciate your going 'on record'. Like you weren't on record to begin with, LOL. Since you are 'now' on record, let it also confirm that you either have a memory problem and/or didn't read the story.

Here's a subtext in my story relating CrunchBang to Debian:

"CrunchBang Waldorf 11 went into production May 6, 2013 directly on the heels of Debian 7 Wheezy which was released May 4, 2013. It was a long wait for those who long for all things Debian, but it arrived. Finally. I think if I had to go back to any Debian derivative, it would be #!. It's got everything a your average technophile could wish for. And, I would be remiss if I didn't mention we have +Philip Newborough to thank for that."

And, during that August 2012 timeframe, I opened a ticket at CrunchBang requesting a backport of seccomp-bpf to the CrunchBang 11 3.2 kernel and communicated directly with Philip Newborough.

Do you have any other false assertions to lob at me? So far you are still shooting blanks.

Sleep well.

You got it wrong, it is not you I am trying to convince.

In your article you pretend you are reviewing CrunchBang May release, and in fact you admit you tested some beta image for a different version, one year before. To me this is not a review. You compiled the text of your article form public available information, added your own anti-Debian and pro-Fedora cr@p, and presented it as CrunchBang review. You failed to notice CrunchBang is based on Debian.

This is the kind of articles you have in your garbage collection at linuxadvocates dot com, and no amount of trolling here will change that. I pity those who contribute money to your site, and the other advocates there.

Dear Scott,

Could we please get an "ignore" button? Or a knob somewhere to increase the SNR?

Sincerely, gus3

"You'd like me to go away? Bwahahahahahahahah." (D. Schmitz)

Looks like LXer does. No links to your daily troll tsunami for the last few days.

Now let's get back to a sane signal/noise ratio, folks.

@Dietrich: I was referring to this comment:

"Cookie cutter Distros do nothing to advance the cause of Linux. Hobbyists and experimenters will remain a tiny minority on the fringes of society as one major commercial Linux Distro continues to innovate and supersede Windows.

That Distro is Red Hat.

I stake my reputation on it."

So, I repeat my original question: What is this cause of which you speak? Whose cause is it and what is its aims or is this some personal agenda that you have?