Linux and Open Source

Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols & Paula Rooney

Groklaw accused of censorship

By | November 19, 2010, 1:02pm PST

Summary: Especially obnoxious is sandboxing, censoring the fact of censorship from the person being censored.

To my mind, Groklaw is one of the indispensable sites in open source.

Just don’t get on Pamela Jones’ bad side. (I’m afraid I just did.)

When I took this beat, back when the SCO vs. IBM case was in full flower, Groklaw was always on top of the story. Sometimes I disagreed with it, but I saw it as unbiased, authoritative and credible.

There have always been those who claimed the opposite, starting with SCO management. The mysterious Pamela Jones — never seen, a self-described paralegal, signing everything PJ, but with a detective’s instincts, a librarian’s access to research materials, and a litigator’s sharp tongue — added spice and mystery.

If you’re a legal geek, Groklaw is delicious enough to be practically pornographic.

But now several people have come forward with separate claims of Groklaw censoring their comments, and Florian Mueller has posted examples of the practice at Scribd.

What in the past was only hinted at is now out in the open.

Mueller’s Scribd piece describes some examples of comments being expunged and describes incidents going back to 2005. Most involve Groklaw itself, and charges of its censoring comments.

Especially obnoxious to some is the issue of “sandboxing.” A user will write a comment, they can see it when they log back in from the same IP address, but it won’t appear to the public. The person being censored is having that censorship censored.

Thomas Klupp, a longtime Linux user, wrote this has happened to him, when he questioned Groklaw policies.

“It is normal that discussion forums censor really bad comments. But my comment was a polite question.” A copy was passed to me. It was a comment that questioned Groklaw’s policy regarding discussions.

Blogger William Beebe wrote in 2007 of a similar experience. People whom PJ dislikes see comments, even entire threads, disappear, even if they are on point and supportive of Groklaw’s general point of view.

One programmer who has been subjected to this treatment claimed in a note to me that PJ has a “conspiratorial mindset” and “nothing better to do than write about you all day every day.” (This may be why he then asked that his name not be used.)

One person who is quite public in his complaints is Jay Maynard, maintainer of open source Hercules. Correction: The story text originally read TurboHercules, although the link is to Maynard’s open source project.

As he wrote on his blog, “The writing was on the wall was when she picked one statement out of my long post, replied to it with a vicious attack on my credentials as an open source community member, and ignored all the rest of what I wrote. I can now only assume she did so because she found the facts inconvenient.”

And that’s the bottom line here.

No one is accusing Pamela Jones or Groklaw of violating any law. Most of those who have written on this issue, like Maynard, have the highest regard for the site’s work. What they’re questioning are is just what Jones  questions so eloquently — a lack of transparency.

As one source who showed me extensive evidence on this point noted, while asking that his name not be used, “It’s PJ’s soapbox and she can have her way with it. The only real issue from my perspective is that she’s sneaky.”

For any discussion site to succeed people must feel free to disagree. I know comments to ZDNet are sometimes removed, but never by me, and never without sound reason based on a stated policy. That’s all anyone is asking for here.

Tell us what the policy is. Don’t just try to make people or statements you don’t like disappear. What’s fine for a personal Web site is not fine for a scaled community considered the journal of record in open source law.

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

Dana Blankenhorn has been a business journalist for 30 years, a tech freelancer since 1983.

Disclosure

Dana Blankenhorn

Dana Blankenhorn has been a journalist, writer and part-time futurist for over 30 years.

At the present moment I run only a personal blog in addition to my ZDNet open source blog.

DanaBlankenhorn.Com has the subtitle The War Against Oil. In the past I have used it to write about political history, e-commerce, personal matters, some ideas related to open source, and The World of Always On, which is the idea of using sensors, motes and RFID to turn WiFi links into platforms for applications which live in the air.

My IRA account at Schwab holds a few tech shares, most notably some Intel and Applied Materials, but there are no open source companies in it. I don’t even own any CBS stock.

Biography

Dana Blankenhorn

Dana Blankenhorn has been a business journalist for nearly 25 years and has covered the online world professionally since 1985. He founded the Interactive Age Daily for CMP Media, and has written for the Chicago Tribune, Advertising Age's "NetMarketing" supplement, and dozens of other publications over the years.

82
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

RE: Groklaw accused of censorship
JACOBSONR 14th Oct
Good day to confirm this comment I would appreciate T h e b e s t o f Z D N e t d e l i v e r e d your website very nice to everyone Yes, Oracle is the only one with shared-disk architecture, but that is there advantage. It means you can add or remove nodes and the database lives on. In a shared nothing architecture, if you lose a node, you lose the system. I'm sure Oracle appreciates EMC highlighting their advantage.I also desire to signal in your RSS feeds. Thank you as soon as once again and maintain up the great operate Awesome post! Thank you very much || thanks for nice content this is really benefit to me.
0 Votes
+ -
Let me get this straight.
Dietrich T. Schmitz, ~ Your Linux Advocate 19th Nov 2010
You, Dana, chose to write about censorship practices and put Groklaw.net in a poor light for doing so?

What is your position on censorship at ZDNet?
What is the point of this article?

I think this is pretty funny actually--the pot calling the kettle black.

I will say of all of the blogs however, yours as been more 'tolerant' of commenters than any other.

Ed Bott, aka Mr. Microsofty, is the worst offender of heavy-handed, arbitrary censorship.
0 Votes
+ -
@Dietrich T. Schmitz, Your Linux Advocate:

If you're so pro-Groklaw, what do you think of the fact that a comment by your fellow registered Groklaw user JamesK just got censored within a minute or two of being posted?


Groklaw accused of censorship
Authored by: JamesK on Friday, November 19 2010 @ 04:28 PM EST

The link is
http://www.groklaw.net/comment.php?mode=display&sid=20101113003329789&title=Groklaw%20accused%20of%20censorship&type=article&order=&hideanonymous=0&pid=886947#c887108 and it no longer shows that comment.
0 Votes
+ -
Now the link to that JamesK comment works again. But it didn't for some time. Screenshots were of course saved. At least the Groklaw audience now gets a chance to discuss the issue.
  • Flagged
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
RE: Groklaw accused of censorship
jperlow 19th Nov 2010
@Dietrich T. Schmitz, Your Linux Advocate In all fairness, Ed, Dana, and every blogger on this site has ZERO CONTROL over what gets deleted. If it gets reported as spam or offensive (which anyone can do, even you) there are CBSi employees who decide what gets removed and what does not.
0 Votes
+ -
Editor
RE: Groklaw accused of censorship
David Grober Updated - 19th Nov 2010
@Dietrich T. Schmitz, Your Linux Advocate

It's probably worth noting here that neither Ed Bott nor Dana Blankenhorn nor *any* ZDNet blogger has the ability to censor/delete a Talkback message in their blogs. However, our site's moderators will consider for removal any messages that violate CBSi's Acceptable use policy.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Groklaw accused of censorship
DanaBlankenhorn 19th Nov 2010
@David Grober Thanks for the link to the policy. I have never asked for the power to censor talkbacks. Glad someone else takes the responsibility.
0 Votes
+ -
that Groklaw, who censors in such a way as to paint MS in an "allways unflatering light" may have just been exposed for what they are.

You hate the fact that Ed Bott shoots you down weekly with facts, and all you have is your typical "Linux is the best and hire me to do it for you" posts.

Now your upset that your "reference material" may prove to be tainted, detroying everything you use to "build your reputation on".

Sorry, even your heros can be fakes.
0 Votes
+ -
I concure
Mister Spock 19th Nov 2010
Mr. Zern. I did notice his name was that of a member of Groklaw.
Though it may have started innocently enough, like many a cause that has gone astray it appears it has morphed into nothing more then one person's ticket to "fame and fortune", in which the manipulation of facts is done for no other reason then to fill the needs of the one behind it.

And many of the faithful too blinded to the truth follow and defend it because it gives them that which they have allways looked for, like the witch hunts of your early history, or the McCarthy era not too far in your nation's past.

People like Mr. Schmitz want so badly for Microsoft to be the nexus of all things evil, they will latch onto a site like Groklaw, as their manipulation of facts gives hime exactly what he has allways looked for.
plain
0 Votes
+ -
So how much...
ahh so Updated - 22nd Nov 2010
...were you paid this week to give out that silly conjecture?

Did Redmond give you a bigger cubicle to sit in?

Maybe they added a door to it, huh?

wink
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Groklaw accused of censorship
DanaBlankenhorn 19th Nov 2010
@Dietrich T. Schmitz, Your Linux Advocate I realized that my own position, and that of ZDNet, would be subject to just this criticism. The difference is transparency. ZDNet has a policy, which folks are made aware of. Groklaw claims not to have one, but does this anyway. That's fine for a personal site, but not for a scaled community that claims to be doing journalism. In my opinion. You are free to disagree.
0 Votes
+ -
Re: Less than truthful
osreinstall 19th Nov 2010
@DanaBlankenhorn

Actually Dana, it isn't good to do for a personal website either. If you don't eat your own dogfood people will eventually stay away. Most personal websites don't have policies anyway.
0 Votes
+ -
What acn you expect, What X M$ employee now owns zdnet
SoYouSaid Updated - 19th Nov 2010
Lets see who will come up with the answer ..........
0 Votes
+ -
Please enlighten us to that answer
Mister Spock 19th Nov 2010
SoYouSaid. I know it is not Steve Jobs, as he has his hands full with Disney, and their offerings of news services thru ABC and their afiliates, so it does narrow it down a little.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Groklaw accused of censorship
Loverock Davidson 19th Nov 2010
HAHA Suck it PJ! I'm glad to see Groklaw getting called out. I never liked that site anyway with their very bias opinions. And PJ claiming she's not a lawyer but tries to pretend she is one. No broken heart here for that site.
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
RE: Groklaw accused of censorship
jperlow 19th Nov 2010
@Loverock Davidson In all fairness to PJ, despite her clear bias towards the Free Software movement and her criticism of anyone who strays even slightly off that narrow path -- she may not be a lawyer, but she is a paralegal and legal research is exactly what she does on that site.
0 Votes
+ -
PJ is not a free software advocate
FlorianMueller 19th Nov 2010
@jperlow A free software advocate would not write a headline like "Why I believe IBM is free to sue the pants off TurboHercules", considering that TurboHercules is a free software startup and such a headline meant support for patent aggression against free software.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Groklaw accused of censorship
DanaBlankenhorn 19th Nov 2010
@jperlow I just want to repeat that I am a fan of Groklaw and of PJ, although she may not want to hear that right now.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Groklaw accused of censorship
DanaBlankenhorn 19th Nov 2010
@Loverock Davidson I disagree strongly. I find Groklaw extremely valuable. I would just like its policies to be transparent and enforced in an evenhanded manner.

Unless of course this is just Pamela Jones' personal web site. In which case it doesn't matter what she does. But then it shouldn't matter to any of us what she writes, either, in that case.

You don't get to have it both ways. You can't stand as an authority and then delete all criticism. Not if you want to remain an authority.
0 Votes
+ -
ALL lOVEROCK DAVIDSON EVER DOES ON
SoYouSaid Updated - 19th Nov 2010
ZDNET IS FLAME ......... HE NEVER BRINGS ANYTHING TO A DISCUSSIONS .....END OF STORY
  • Flagged
0 Votes
+ -
Groklaw's Disclosure Pages
thx-1138_@... Updated - 20th Nov 2010
@DanaBlankenhorn .. provide this:

"...Groklaw is a noncommercial site. It's my home on the internet , and just like if I invited you to my home, I'd appreciate it if you helped keep it clean, tidy and a friendly place to visit..."

Mission Statement:

http://www.groklaw.net/staticpages/index.php?page=20040923045054130

Comment Guidelines:

http://www.groklaw.net/staticpages/index.php?page=2004030120301285

So, for all intents and purposes your comment:

"..Unless of course this is just Pamela Jones' personal web site. In which case it doesn't matter what she does. But then it shouldn't matter to any of us what she writes, either, in that case. "

... added to the contents of the 'Mission Statement' and it's pretty unequivocal - i think she was acting within the rules set out on *her own, personal site*.

Your last comment is actually the most valid you have made yet. You're dead right, you can't have your cake and eat it .. but then again, if it is just her personal site ... pffft .. that says it all: she's judge, jury and executioner. And you know what? That's completely fine in the context of her own little universe .. just don't expect the rest of us to take her seriously.

The court of public opinion is a powerful thing, no amount of legalese, strong arming and subterfuge will keep a person afloat when they lose all credibility. If what you claim *is true* (..and i've seen no concrete evidence so far from you to prove so), JP and Groklaw will .. by hook or by crook .. invariably, crash and burn.

Sincerely
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Groklaw accused of censorship
JustABystander 21st Nov 2010
@DanaBlankenhorn I don't agree with much of your reasoning. It's clear that Groklaw is Pamela Jones' personal web site. That has little to do with whether what she chooses to put on the site is relevant or credible. That determination should only be made based on the quality of the content that is found there. The site actually provides a variety of content, including PJ's personally authored headline stories, selected teasers of current IP-related news stories from around the world, archives of legal documents for cases that have been highlighted by Groklaw, and a forum mechanism for posting and viewing user comments. To the extent that the information found there is fact-based, the policies that Ms. Jones employs to manage her site are irrelevant. To the extent that other content may be merely expressions of personal opinion, its credibility can also be independently determined by each reader apart from the forum's moderation policies.

Your argument about not getting to have it both ways is flawed because it's based on several false assertions. Ms. Jones does not delete anything close to "all" criticism on her site. You can find examples of comments there on any given day that are critical of either a particular point of view held by Ms. Jones, of statements she has made, or any number of other disagreements. Yours is a far weaker argument to try and make when constrained to the truth that only a small amount of criticism is actually ever deleted.

Ms. Jones also does not "stand as an authority" in the way you seem to be implying. She does not present herself as an authority, but rather presents information from other sources along with her own style of commentary that often helps others understand what is being presented. She has to my knowledge never tried to pass herself off as an authority. People are perfectly free to receive the information and form their own opinions about anything on her site, particularly because many of the underlying facts and details are provided alongside the commentary. This is far different from many so-called conventional media sources, where one is often expected to simply take the presenters word for how events should be interpreted. Your own article here suffers somewhat in this regard. It's worth noting that most traditional journalism outlets allow few if any mechanisms for direct and public criticism of their efforts, and yet we don't hear or see equivalent claims from you or others about how this is destroying their credibility.

Complaints about Groklaw forum moderation policies are mostly just a red herring topic instigated by people who have other personal issues with the site and its proprietor. The truest test of whether such policies have been appropriate is the longevity of the Groklaw site and its continued relevance when compared against other online forums during the same time frame. People like to think that total transparency and maximum freedom are worthwhile ideals for community forums, but practical experience seems to show that most forums that tried to apply such ideals in the real world either didn't last long or found their original mission and community environment transformed in unintended and often unwanted ways.
0 Votes
+ -
Loverock but we have to listen to your pro M$ BS
SoYouSaid Updated - 19th Nov 2010
every day, your the one who should be censored for your off the FUD you spew every day ..... and zdnet allows your FUD no matter how out of context it is......
But he doesn't, so it isn't.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Groklaw accused of censorship
ahh so 22nd Nov 2010
@goob256

Your point?
0 Votes
+ -
GL is a target
tacuasin 19th Nov 2010
Some companies, people, and litigants that are the focus of GL don't like the scrutiny. They are using their resources to attack and disrupt GL.

It is an overwhelmingly successful site because of its censorship, rules, and tastes. Be thankful for the rules and censorship. It is a feature, not a fault. Most importantly of all, GL is not about GL. The focus remains where pj wants it. So discussing GL on GL, other than for awards shouldn't happen. Shills, turfers, and pj scoldees can post elsewhere like the instant site.
0 Votes
+ -
Of course GL is a target
John Zern 19th Nov 2010
wouldn't someone who censored about you in such a way as to distort the facts to their liking be a target of you?

Of course you wouldn't take it lieing down, why should anyone else?
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Groklaw accused of censorship
DanaBlankenhorn 19th Nov 2010
@tacuasin Can you please provide a link to the rules? If it's as public as the ZDNet acceptable use policy above, then I stand corrected. But none of the people who contacted me for this story were aware of any such page.

No matter what such a page would say, by the way, it would be fine with me. So long as it's transparent and applied consistently.
0 Votes
+ -
You failed to vet all facts
Dietrich T. Schmitz, ~ Your Linux Advocate 20th Nov 2010
@DanaBlankenhorn
nt
0 Votes
+ -
Tempus in a Teapot
DM Perkins 19th Nov 2010
Does zdnet have nothing better to write about?

PJ has been up front that she censors comments on her site. If I'd have time I'd look up her exact wording... but it is along the lines of trolls and impolite behavior.

And from a look at the Nov 18 data on the scribd "evidence" that comment is both impolite and trollish.

Groklaw is a site that contains two things, raw data from cases of interest to PJ (i.e. SCo cases and this Google case) and her opinion about them.

And from a quick scan of the deleted comments a lot of them could be reasonably be taken as attacks on PJ.

Find some real issue to complain about.

DM Perkins
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Groklaw accused of censorship
DanaBlankenhorn 19th Nov 2010
@DM Perkins I am aware of what you term a "policy," but the examples I was shown had nothing to do with politeness. That's my problem. And that's the problem of the critics who contacted me for the story.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Groklaw accused of censorship
Eduardo_z 19th Nov 2010
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Groklaw accused of censorship
DanaBlankenhorn 20th Nov 2010
@Eduardo_z Those guidelines are not being enforced in anything like an even-handed way. That's the point of my piece. Anyone who questions anything about what Groklaw does or says, even in the most polite way, has their comment sandboxed, which means it's censored without their knowledge.

When polite disagreement is not tolerated, and that's shown by what I was shown, then you have a policy that's not being ignored, a windy version of "it's my site and I'll do what I want." Again, fine as long as it's just your site and not pretending to be a community that is the last word on Internet and open source law.
0 Votes
+ -
as long as it fights M$ and its cronies
Linux Geek 19th Nov 2010
Groklaw ia a 'good' site even if it's maintained by IBM.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Groklaw accused of censorship
DanaBlankenhorn 19th Nov 2010
@Linux Geek Agreed.
0 Votes
+ -
How so
Mister Spock 19th Nov 2010
Mr.Blankenhorn? Should Groklaw fight Microsoft to the exclusion of all else, and if so, to what end?

To believe that the ends justify the means would null and void any argument you have had against phones companies and others, as that is how you believe they operate.
plain
0 Votes
+ -
And if the people there hated Linux?
Michael Alan Goff 20th Nov 2010
Would it still be okay?
0 Votes
+ -
You tell us
ahh so 22nd Nov 2010
NT
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Groklaw accused of censorship
DannyO_0x98 19th Nov 2010
Groklaw is not the government. The site may apply whatever standards they wish as to who may or may not comment.

I see Florian Mueller and others "censored" are getting out their messages here. I presume they have websites and their own policies regarding comments. If not, I believe they are capable of starting their own websites.

No harm, no foul.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Groklaw accused of censorship
DanaBlankenhorn 19th Nov 2010
@DannyO_0x98 Technically you may be right. But Groklaw holds itself out to be more than a personal Web site. It holds itself out to be a scaled community and the last word on Internet and open source law. Which do you think it is?
0 Votes
+ -
A means to put food on the the table
Mister Spock 21st Nov 2010
and cars in the garage.
The site caters to those who already have some style of intense hatred for Microsoft.
By giving the people "what they want" by restating the preconceived guilt of Microsoft which the members already believe, they continue to come.
And the entities behind it continue to receive their funding.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Groklaw accused of censorship
FlorianMueller 19th Nov 2010
@DannyO_0x98 I do have my own website. Toward the end of my Scribd document showing GroklXX's censorship I explain the decision I took there on comments. There's a right way and a wrong way to do it. Pseudo-pluralism (on the surface allowing open discussions while actually acting oppressively) is absolutely the wrong way.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Groklaw accused of censorship
newsnight 19th Nov 2010
This has been a dirty secret for years. Most of the victims of Jones' fatwas have vowed never to speak of it until SCO has been destroyed. They did not and still don't want GL's abusive practices to tarnish the wider battle against SCO.

So many of GL's most respected contributors have found themselves unpersonned, and woe betide any GL commenter who asks what happened to AllParadox, or Marbux, or MathFox, or br3n, or Carla Schroeder, or many, many more. Say Hallo to Mister Sandbox. The suspicion is that any other potential leaders of the anti-SCO community must be neutralised, leaving Jones The Red Monolith unrivalled and unchallenged. Links to other anti-SCO resources, like Scofacts, Investor Village, community spreadsheets of SCO financials and the big table of SCO's accusations, are ruthlessly suppressed in GL comments, save for hysterical conspiratorial accusations from Jones that they are the work of the enemies of free software.

And then there are Jones' emails, which, when she's at her worst, bear the words "not for publication".

Having said all that, the GL AUP does exist (though is difficult to find). The question you *should* be asking, Dana, is where is the Privacy Policy? Because there isn't one, and it suits the reclusive Ms Jones that way. Just ask anyone whose IP address has been "outed" in the comments section.

Thanks for breaking this story, Dana. But you'll be in for a *lot* of criticism.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Groklaw accused of censorship
DanaBlankenhorn 21st Nov 2010
@newsnight Criticism is fine. Discussion is fine. Traffic is traffic. But you might be surprised at how few people are actually reading this piece, and the accompanying discussion thread. It's not even in the top 10 for the month.

I think that indicates some respect for Groklaw, and an understanding that regardless of whatever personal trips PJ may be accused of having, the site does good work and seeing dirty laundry about it aired isn't very newsworthy.
0 Votes
+ -
Astonishing piece of contrived pseudo-journalism here Dana. Take one rabble-rouser (Mooller), mix in a handful of self-important wing nuts with a perpetual sense of 'righteous' indignation at Ms. Jones for not giving them free reign to use her site as a platform to promote their self-serving agendas. Suddenly you've managed to create some semblance of an issue, at least on the surface anyway. Enjoy the hits on this story - you won't get any more from me going forward, nor will any ZDNet or mothership related website.

You've soiled your reputation as fully and completely as your co-worker Mr. De Haas. Or perhaps you just left yourself logged on one day at work and De Haas is really the author of this tripe piece.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Groklaw accused of censorship
chipbeef 19th Nov 2010
@DannyLucotch - I agree. FM has never struck me as the most stable or reliable of sources.

@Dana- I have followed your blog for a while now, and although I don't always agree with your analysis, I have felt that you have done a reasonable job of being balanced and accurate. You kinda blew it on this one, though.
0 Votes
+ -
Reliability of sources
FlorianMueller 19th Nov 2010
@chipbeef I'd be happy to discuss concerns you have about me being a "stable or reliable" source, if you specify them. I don't think you could prove any unreliability based on what I've published on my blog. Just give a couple of examples where you disagreee. Going into too much detail on this very page would be off-topic, however, but making an unspecific allegation doesn't help either.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Groklaw accused of censorship
DanaBlankenhorn 20th Nov 2010
@chipbeef Florian is not "the source." He is "a" source. But I demanded not only substantiation before writing, but named individuals who would let their names be used and who would tell the same story of their own volition.

Yeah, if I relied on Florian as the soul source on anything (beyond Florian's dinner plans) that would be a mistake. But I didn't.
0 Votes
+ -
Clearly Dana...
zkiwi 19th Nov 2010
You did no research, 'coz if you did then you'd have found this easily found page off of GL (http://www.groklaw.net/staticpages/index.php?page=2004030120301285).

That and it's PJ's site, PJ can do what on earth they want to. And why would you or anyone expect it to be any other way?

What a lame ass attack blog piece from you. Ah well, it's par for the course from zdnet these days.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Groklaw accused of censorship
DanaBlankenhorn 20th Nov 2010
@zkiwi If we see that as PJ's personal Web site, then you're absolutely right. She can do what she wants. And I praised her extensively throughout my piece. I just want her to follow the warnings on that page you cite.

Some processes would be nice, too. Assuming that this is a community and the last word on Internet and open source law, which is what it's treated as.

If it's just PJ's personal Web site, however, then you're right and I'm wrong. You can have whatever arbitrary policies you want on a personal Web site.

Just don't expect to get more credibility for what you say than we offer a personal web site.
0 Votes
+ -
Good day to confirm this comment I would appreciate T h e b e s t o f Z D N e t d e l i v e r e d your website very nice to everyone Yes, Oracle is the only one with shared-disk architecture, but that is there advantage. It means you can add or remove nodes and the database lives on. In a shared nothing architecture, if you lose a node, you lose the system. I'm sure Oracle appreciates EMC highlighting their advantage.I also desire to signal in your RSS feeds. Thank you as soon as once again and maintain up the great operate Awesome post! Thank you very much || thanks for nice content this is really benefit to me.

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix