I find it interesting that you're imploring me to discuss the facts when I started this thread by calling out incorrect "facts". I'm the only one that seems to be interested in the black and white facts, whereas you'd prefer to alter the OP's words so that they become facts.
What you're interpreting from his statements certainly isn't obvious, as it's just the way that you interpreted it. I interpreted it differently, using only the words that he typed and not filling in any of my own as you have -- I think you realize that, too, since you italicized your additions.
> (I wonder now which one of the users you were in that forum thread. sednet?)
I do not post on the Linode forums.
Fine, you're right; I might have been a little harsh on taligent, but I'm perpetually annoyed by crusaders who latch on to one mistake so strongly that the surrounding facts of the mistake begin to distort in their memory. If you're going to have a problem with Linode, back it up with the truth -- we get enough of alternate reality with politics.
I get that you're annoyed. I'm trying to convince you to be less annoyed. You and I have had perfectly reasonable discussions in the past; I'm surprised that you're responding this way to someone else.
I think it should go without saying that we should read other users' comments as charitably as possible. You say that my reading of his comment is "just the way that [I] interpreted it", but then you bless your interpretation of his comment as being "the black and white facts".
But English is messy. It carries nuances and context and hidden clues. Worse still, everyone has the attention span of a coked-out gnat now. Brevity is supposed to be the most important property of a statement, so we don't go around explicitly writing in all of the nuances and blanks and context. Thus it's natural to omit something like, "when the incident occurred" from the end of every statement. (Which, by the way, I italicized as emphasis; even a cursory glance at my comments page would have clued you in that I do that habitually.)
Your interpretation assumes (emphasis again) that he was deliberately lying.
You called someone a liar.
Publicly.
Based on your interpretation of what they said.
Whereas I assume that it's more likely that he was simply being brief.
Maybe you're right and I'm wrong. But, I'm unwilling to assume that someone else is a liar when there is clearly room for misinterpretation of what they said, just as I'm unwilling to assume that anyone that I'm talking with here is an idiot. (Although, I'm becoming more willing to assume deliberate obtuseness and argumentativeness ... not apropos of anything in this thread.)
I don't want to brow-beat you for your reply to him, but you're still thinking of him as a "crusader", and you're still assuming that the facts are "distorted" in his memory. When I asked to stick to the facts, I meant that it would have been sufficient to say simply that Linode notified the 8 affected customers and posted a statement to their site about the incident.
That would have left room for both you and him to be right, instead of accusing him of grandstanding and being a liar and a crusader and so on and so forth.
And most importantly: whether or not we agree on his characterization of what happened, he does still have a legitimate point. Linode did not handle that incident admirably, it can be contrasted starkly with the way that CloudFlare handled their incident, and Linode is still compounding their initial error by not taking steps to correct their handling of future incidents -- all points from my previous comment which you completely ignored, in favor of continuing to attack another user here.
What you're interpreting from his statements certainly isn't obvious, as it's just the way that you interpreted it. I interpreted it differently, using only the words that he typed and not filling in any of my own as you have -- I think you realize that, too, since you italicized your additions.
> (I wonder now which one of the users you were in that forum thread. sednet?)
I do not post on the Linode forums.
Fine, you're right; I might have been a little harsh on taligent, but I'm perpetually annoyed by crusaders who latch on to one mistake so strongly that the surrounding facts of the mistake begin to distort in their memory. If you're going to have a problem with Linode, back it up with the truth -- we get enough of alternate reality with politics.