Hallo friend,

often sentences cited *out of context* are not carrying the same meaning as they did *in context*. But you are even not citing the *whole* my sentence! I'm pretty sure I can construct anything our of your own phrases in this thread...

If you want to get abefroman learn grsecurity, it would be more useful to provide him with useful resources rather than anything else...

You've already posted you are not familiar with GRSecurity, so I think that at this point in time it would be wise to pause and reconsider if a defensive posture or retalliation serves you better than just acknowledging you lack the right amount of knowledge to contribute to this thread constructively, OK?

It would have been most constructive to the thread to avoid insulting me for the wrong reasons and say something useful (what you are *not* doing).

I believe I was very specific on what merits I do recommend SELinux to abefroman. Just put your money where your mouth is as I'm not going to care to argue with you any more.

While you made some remarks about SE Linux that is not the point here. Some of the facts you stated were not in accordance with Real Life and that was made clear to you in friendly manner. You then chose to detoriate the discussion by countering that with non-arguments which I addressed, which is my duty being one of the moderators. In closing I can only say that it pains me to have to conclude it is too hard for you to solely focus on the facts and interpret things the right way. I'll pass up on commenting on your other retalliatory statements as it would serve no purpose and result in completely asymmetrical arguments anyway.

To the OP: please address the questions and remarks in this thread giving thought to facts only.

You are a moderator!? Haha! What have you addressed? That I was cited out of context? I don't like to be argued with wrong arguments. I would be happy if somebody proved me wrong with real arguments but I haven't actually seen anybody except me address the user's question - what is easier.
I just don't want to argue about things not relevant to the discussion and you as a moderator should have read carefully enough to understand that. For example I didn't argue whether grsecurity is mature or not because that's not my point (nor I really care how mature it is).

AFAIK correct etiquette is to express opinion being as much close to the topic as possible. I find it wrong to argue about a minor point from somebody else and then judge from that who's correct and who can post. I don't argue about many arguments others are giving (I'm not trying here to imply anything about they being truth or not) because these are not too much relevant to what I was saying and you call this retaliatory statements. Of course you could have cited me *in context* and argue my arguments are not relevant or stupid or whatever but you chose to tell me you are a very important moderator and my posts are not wanted here.

thxbye

The http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...elinux-767189/ was defused by extracting these posts. Aforementioned thread should stay on topic now and clear of any overly argumentative or otherwise OT posts as they will not be deemed acceptable.