Re: [OT] Vijay Mukhi says ...

[Suresh Ramasubramanian <mallet@xxxxxxx>]

*[Atul Chitnis on Wed, Mar 21, 2001 at 02:36:41PM +0530]:

>note. Where do you stand now that the offender not only repeated the
>offence, but has done so *again* without sticking to the rules? The

Atul, to be fair, David (who reported the "help wanted ad" _has_ followed the list rules this time

> Subject: [LIG] Re: Seeking a Linux or Unix programming guru for CTO position
> [Commercial]

This particular issue may be treated as closed, I expect

>Flooding him with abusive email is only going to boost his ego, egging him
>on to repeat his act to get more "fanmail"


Oh well, I definitely dont mean to flood the giy with _abusive_ email.  
Taking one of his articles apart - and analyzing it threadbare (in a typical "letters to the editor" style) is perfectly fair, IMHO at least.

It will, if anything, cause the newspaper to take a longer, harder look at Mukhi than it is currently looking.

>again in the world. It is clear that the man has tried before and has been
>handled, and is not really a threat because no one takes him seriously.

The people who take him seriously are teh people who take Dewang Mehta (and in another context - quizzing) Derek O'Brien seriously.  Namely, the mass media and management (which is inclined to believe the mass media's adulation of these characters)

It +is+ a genuine threat IMHO at least.  All the facts discussed here would be better off when brought to the attention of newspapers - and it'd also help focus attention (of a positive sort) on linux.  The media won't be very eager to criticize linux (just as it would be reluctant to criticize M$).

>And so the saga ends.

... it goes on and on you mean.

	-s