On Mon, 14 Aug 2006, Charles Schulz wrote:
[snip]
... Then there was a leak in the press that got exploited by imho
unscrupulous journalists. ...
[snip]
I had the feeling that the early draft would be trotted out again, as
we've seen that happen in other circumstacnes many times before. e.g.
Massachusetts. When I saw the InfoWorld article the other day, I
Louis, Charles and others did a rather good job putting this one to rest
the first time around. In a day or two, this 'news' will get picked up by
the non-English sources and it would be helpful to have rebuttals already
translated for use by then. Maybe pointing to the earlier rebutals/slams
to the FUD is in order.
In general we've seen this tactic before, and we'll see it again: Dusting
off old, outdated info and rushing it out as new anti-OOo FUD. We just
need to keep in mind that each FUD bomb will pop up more than once and
keep the rebuttals fresh.
-Lars
Lars Noodén ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
OpenOffice.org: Now ISO 26300 Standards Compliant !
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
