Binky... excellent post! And I agree with every single one of your points. But (and you knew that was coming... /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif )... as with everything in this world, there is more to the story and I would like to take this opportunity to address each of your points and fill in perhaps some blanks.
[ QUOTE ]
Well, I had to log in to support Tomas, though if I were a moderator I may have made a similar remark as Empath.
As a member, my vote's is to let the notifications continue, perhaps especially because of the Gestalt result of the numerous posts.
[/ QUOTE ]
*Agreed. I appreciate the notifications too. And would appreciate them more if they were posted with genuine concern for Windows users instead of as a taunt. Read on.
[ QUOTE ]
Here are some reasons by which I promote my vote...
1. Yes, the other OS's have their own problems (eg: If the default behavior pattern of a buffer overflow is to dump the offender into an all-access mode, how secure can a *nix OS be?) We can all chuckle at that too.
[/ QUOTE ]
*And yet we don't hear about those to the same extent, do we? No one wants to go into such detail about those things. I believe Empath posted a few links above that were never reported by Tomas.
[ QUOTE ]
2. Microsoft evangelized their OS as being extremely secure, and made many many sales based largely on that very claim. I believe the mantra started with "NT is C4-secure!" Well, however unobtainable that supposed lofty goal was, NT was a complete charlatain. I'd go so far as to say that Microsoft blatantly lied, and I'm not holding a grudge; I've never been burned by that rediculous claim.
[/ QUOTE ]
*Neither have I. And neither has Tomas. So one must wonder at his crusade.
[ QUOTE ]
3. Microsoft continues to use software design models that are inherently insecure, claims their software to be secure, then when it is made clear that it is by no means secure, retreats to press releases stating "users want that feature". Fair enough to build it if people want it, but don't also try to say the software is secure. But they do! They're kinda calling in the dogs on themselves dontcha think?
[/ QUOTE ]
*Again... agreed. But again, I have to ask why Tomas feels it's his personal crusade to head up the pack? He isn't affected by any of this.
[ QUOTE ]
4. I'm usually able to take some preventive action based on Tomas' notification, but I'm not so paranoid that I bother to check other security web sites specifically looking for the whether there is a new OS security hole discovered/expoited.
[/ QUOTE ]
*Ah... now we're getting into the meat of this matter. So why does Tomas feel that he needs to check them? Public service to the rest of us? If only that were his only motivation. Read on.
[ QUOTE ]
5. The nature of CPF members is to discuss or debate. I really don't think these posts sound anything like the "Microsoft sucks! / Linux rules! / Macs are for weenies!" level of flame-fanning that you'd be right to disuade. At its very worst (and it hasn't been Tomas) my personal view is more along the lines of "every OS falls short, and look where this one falls short (again) in the very area it was proclaimed to excel!"
[/ QUOTE ]
*Funny thing that... Tomas never posted any updates or "warnings" to us until after he was told to knock off the "Microsoft sucks! / Linux rules! / Macs are for weenies!" crap in another thread. That type of "flame-fanning" was taking place in more threads than I care to count and after trying tactfully to disuade it, I finally had to tell him (and a couple others) to knock it off. It was so completely out of hand that many threads ended up closed because of the bickering that ensued... headed up most of the time by Tomas.
[ QUOTE ]
6. As I sit here in front of my Win2K/Linux dual-boot box, I do enjoy a chuckle that goes along with the sigh of needing to head over to windowsupdate to go through the at-least-15-minutes of check-update-reboot-checkagain that usually proceeds after my reading latest the Tomas->MS post.
[/ QUOTE ]
*Well I'm glad you got something out of them. BTW... did you go and apply that "fix" that he pointed people in the direction of that ended up being tantamount to emailing someone a virus who you know has no virus protection? That was irresponsible and not amusing at all.
[ QUOTE ]
So I suppose the greatest reason I vote in favor of letting Tomas continue the trend is number 6; I came to the Cafe for maybe a chuckle and maybe some useful information. His posts almost always provide plenty of both. Please let it roll on.
[/ QUOTE ]
*Binky... here's the thing... like I said, if Tomas's motivation was to actually help us all, then we wouldn't have a problem. And yes, I am fully aware that I am not a mindreader and I don't really know what Tomas's motivation is but from how things have gone, it's not that difficult to guess. As I pointed out earlier, Tomas never posted these updates until he was told to knock off with the constant flaming and baiting of Windows users.
Quote from DavidW... "I feel that Tomas has had nothing but contempt for CPF rules and the Staff. There may be no single incident where he crossed the line but he has stepped right up to and skirted it enough times to be branded a violator of rules."
This latest incident is simply the final straw.
Now if someone else... preferably an actual Windows user... wants to take up the banner and keep us all up on the latest "stuff", that would be very cool! All we ask is that whoever does it is responsible enough not to point people in the direction of potentially harmful "fixes" and is also responsible enough to post official information and not just biased articles that truly are designed to do nothing but bait or inflame.
Thanks again for your post Binky! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif