> Actually, it's central to the issue: if you were > capable of understanding what I've been talking about > (or at least sufficiently humble to recognize the > depths of your ignorance), you'd stop polluting this > forum with posts lacking any technical content > whatsoever.
I don't speak "full of myself", apparently nobody else here does either, because nobody has a clue what you continue to ramble about. > The question that was asked was answered - it's > hardly my problem if you could not competently parse > the question, or the answer, or the subsequent > explanation (though your continuing drivel after > those three strikes suggests that you may simply be > ineducable). Except nobody but you seems to be able to acertain any sort of answer from your rambling response. The question was simple, as would an adequate answer. You either aren't "literate" enough to understand the question, or you're wrong. It's clearly the latter. > No: I answered his question and *also* observed that > he probably really didn't know what he wanted (at > least insofar as being able to *justify* the > intensity of his desire for it). Funny, the original poster, and everyone else disagrees with you. But with such visions of granduer, I suppose we're all just wrong. > No one said that there were: the real issue is that > there's not much reason to care, since the available > solutions don't need to be *identical* to offer > *comparable* value (i.e., they each have different > strengths and weaknesses and the net result yields no > clear winner - much as some of you would like to > believe otherwise). > Right, so yet again, you were wrong. Stop telling us what you think we need. Stop trying to impose your arrogant ASSumptions onto us. WE don't care what YOU think WE need. > Indeed, but it has become obvious that most of the > reasons are non-technical in nature. This place is > fanboy heaven, where never is heard a discouraging > word (and you're hip-deep in buffalo sh!t). There you go. You heard it here first folks. Anyone who doesn't agree with bill is a fanboy. > > Hell, I came here myself 18 months ago because ZFS > seemed interesting, but found out that the closer I > looked, the less interesting it got. Perhaps it's > not surprising that so many of you never took that > second step: it does require actual technical > insight, which seems to be in extremely short supply > here. > So leave. > So short that it's not worth spending time here from > any technical standpoint: at this point I'm mostly > here for the entertainment, and even that is starting > to get a little tedious. > > - bill Oh bill, I think we both know your ego won't be able to stop without being banned or getting the *last word*. Unfortunately you bring nothing to the table but arrogance, which hasn't, and isn't getting you very far. Keep up the good work though. Are you getting paid by word count, or by post? I'm guessing word count given the long winded content void responses. This message posted from opensolaris.org _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
