What I don't understand is what you are expecting from libraries authors affected by the "aggressive marketing". They can be nice and fight marketing with facts but it gets tiring. Eventually they either give up or fight back. Both are bad but you can't blame authors.
-
-
I'm looking for things we should be able to agree on: no ad hominems, precision in criticism, charitability of interpretation... but even these are seen as contentious now, because they've become associated with one "side" or the other.
-
The economics of those choices favour John's approach to the approach discussed here. You generate more clicks/views/drama faster by making bullshit or outlandish claims then by being fair/nice/precise, at the expense of those on the receiving end. Good trade-off worth keeping?
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
-
My fear is that that is the ultimate destination: every man feeling the need to be proven right, or failing that, right by default.
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.