Re: [gentoo-dev] Misquoted in the GWN

[Grobian <grobian@gentoo.org>]

On 28-11-2005 18:54:14 +0000, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Nov 2005 19:46:57 +0100 Patrick Lauer <patrick@gentoo.org>
> wrote:
> | On Mon, 2005-11-28 at 17:54 +0000, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> | > On Mon, 28 Nov 2005 10:48:01 +0100 Henrik Brix Andersen
> | > <brix@gentoo.org> wrote:
> | > | A friend of mine just alerted me to the fact, that I am featured
> | > | in this weeks Gentoo Weekly News. Odd, I thought, noone had asked
> | > | me anything regarding the GWN...
> | > 
> | > Not the first time this has happened...
> | 
> | Not the first time that people whine. Meh.
> 
> Yes, surprisingly enough people tend to get upset when they're
> misquoted and have their views utterly misrepresented in something
> which most users think is an official Gentoo publication.

Being quoted: ok
Being misquoted: very bad
Having an unofficial Gentoo publication on official Gentoo
infrastructure: priceless.

Seriously: reading the blog entry, I made more or less the same
conclusions as the GWN author, but the problem is just that the blog
item was rephrased and made 'stronger', whereas the official blog was
very careful in wording.  (Possibly an attempt by the GWN author to make
it more easily readable?)  This was just wrong because it was not agreed
on with the respective author, hence resulted in this thread.  GWN
authors need to be a bit more careful with this I think.  However, I
don't think that GWN authors should need permissions to grab exact
quotes which are to be found elsewhere publicly available on the web.
It is just sad to see that (what I assume to be) a "running out of time
and having no content issue" results in such unpleasant misquote for the
respective quoted person.
One can criticise the use of newspapers, but somehow they seem to be
useful for many people.
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list