SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Janrinok writes:
Apology To Microsoft
On Friday, we published a story, submitted by sigma, alleging that Microsoft had attempted to blackmail the UK Government in order to prevent the adoption of UK policy supporting open document standards. Having looked more closely at the linked material provided, the word blackmail is not used but appears only in the submission that we received. As the editor of that particular story I am personally responsible for not having checked the sources sufficiently well and for subsequently releasing the story. I wish to apologise, publicly and unreservedly, for any suggestion that Microsoft attempted to blackmail the UK government. They did not, nor does the accusation stand up to any scrutiny. We have edited the title to prevent any further misunderstanding by our community or others and I hope that this action and my apology to Microsoft is sufficient to atone for my mistake.
Apology to sigma
The editor's role includes that of trying to look at each story from both sides to provide a balanced approach. We are not here to support one particular view in preference to another but to provide material that will inspire discussion between members of our community. I published the story that sigma submitted, but attempted to balance it with the alternative view that suggested it was not specifically a Microsoft trait to defend one's business and that it could be argued that they were also attempting to protect their British workforce. However, I did not make it clear where sigma's comments ended and where my editing began, although I did add an Editor's Comment explaining that the story had been edited and that not all comments were those of the submitter. sigma has, quite justifiably, objected to this action and I must, therefore, apologise to him personally. I do apologise to sigma, again publicly and unreservedly, for any changes that I made to the submission that he feels reflect badly upon him.
Our Role
This was most certainly not my best piece of work and, of course, I must also apologise to the community. The editors do, however, have to edit stories; members of the community should not expect their submissions to be a platform for their personal views. Some stories require more editing than others to be suitable for the front page. In this instance, I made a mistake. We will always try to find a balanced approach to any story that needs it, as described in the Editing Process.
As I have already said, I take full responsibility for the stories that I release, including the one arising from sigma's submission. We value each and every submission, even those that do not make it to publication however, we do ask that submitters do not suggest events or actions that are not backed up by the source material, or are not easily verifiable by other means.
janrinok
Editor
(Score: 1, Disagree) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 23 2015, @11:40PM
Your post is a muddled mess.
You seem to be saying S/N has deep pockets.
Use of pronouns requires precision.
.
As noted by Appalbarry further down in the thread, this episode DID happen.
Redmond did make the threat.
That anyone doubts that is evidence of fanboyism.
What is past is prologue.
While a slightly-incorrect word was used in the previous submission, the direction of the criticism by sigma was accurate.
Soylentils with a better (mental?) thesaurus have noted that the correct word is "extortion".
M$ is NOT due an apology for once again being M$.
The story of The Frog and the Scorpion applies yet again.
The snake will always bite the tender woman.
A leopard cannot change its spots.
MSFT is a serial criminal offender.
One should always be offended by the repeated shady moves they make--but should never be surprised.
-- gewg_
(Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 23 2015, @11:54PM
Are you the AC who's always hating on Tork?
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 24 2015, @12:05AM
For a very brief moment, I thought it was 1998 again, and I was on Slashdot before it became shitty.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 24 2015, @01:48AM
That's all you've got??
It sounds like you're claiming that M$ -has- cleaned up its act and is no longer a win-at-any-cost operation worthy of the moniker.
M$ still up to its old dirty tricks [techrights.org]
...and, of course, there's the topic of this page.
-- gewg_
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 24 2015, @01:56AM
Can you provide a link to a reputable source? Maybe Pravda?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 24 2015, @12:15AM
All I see out of you is anger. It can't be healthy for somebody to constantly be so angry.
(Score: 2) by isostatic on Sunday May 24 2015, @09:36AM
All I see out of you is anger. It can't be healthy for somebody to constantly be so angry.
Even Bruce Banner?
(Score: 2) by Marand on Sunday May 24 2015, @01:16AM
A leopard cannot change its spots.
Is that why you still can't seem to type "Microsoft" in full?
Most of us grew up and realised that the silly euphemisms aren't nearly as clever or edgy as we thought they were when we were kids, and that criticism can be more eloquently stated by not resorting to the petty weapons of childhood.
(Score: 0, Disagree) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 24 2015, @01:29AM
Why would I type 9 characters when 2 will do.
Everyone recognizes the short form (because it represents truth).
Will I give an unrepentant convicted criminal organization a break?
Don't hold your breath.
-- gewg_
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 24 2015, @01:43AM
It's spelled: "Microsoft"
(Score: 2) by Marand on Sunday May 24 2015, @02:05AM
Why would I type 9 characters when 2 will do.
Everyone recognizes the short form (because it represents truth).
If you were interested in efficiency you'd be typing MS instead, it's easier to type than M$ or MICROS~1, both forms you use often, so don't try to bullshit me or anybody else with claims of expediency.
Will I give an unrepentant convicted criminal organization a break?
Don't hold your breath.
This is equally bullshit, because I don't see you giving other companies like Intel, Google, or Apple the same treatment for their behaviour, and they're just as bad as Microsoft. Intel has been involved in the same anti-competitive shenanigans as Microsoft; Google lost a privacy-related suit against the FTC and is currently in an antitrust lawsuit in the EU; Apple has its share of antitrust investigations and has been found guilty of price fixing via conspiring with with major publishers. That's not even including the usual tax evasion strategies they all employ, or any other number of companies that have been found guilty of breaking various laws.
Where's the clever names for the other "convicted criminal organisation"? Just about any large corporation is going to end up a "convicted criminal organisation" eventually because the cost of being caught doesn't outweigh the profits of breaking laws for large businesses (a situation I find detestable). So, skip the self-righteous bullshit, because you've just got a grudge against one specific company.
The euphemisms just come across childish, because calling a company M$ or crApple or Scroogle isn't biting commentary, nor is it particularly insightful. What you're doing is no better than if everyone started calling you "spewg_" because of your "unrepentant spewing of bullshit"; it's not criticism, it's passive-aggressive wankery.
(Score: 3, Touché) by Tork on Sunday May 24 2015, @05:56AM
Why would I type 9 characters when 2 will do.
Three characters. Shift key counts.
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈