He probably doesn't care about you ever having worked with M$ products, or the moderation policy here or even that his comments keep getting zeroed.

All he wants is to keep controlling the conversation. And as far as I know, he's been extremely successfull at it. It seems people just can't get into their heads that it's absolutely pointless to argue anything he says. The moment you respond to him, he wins!

So in my opinion, his posts DESERVE the zero rating. His Diary entry Deserved the deletion and if it was possible, he deserves to be blacklisted.

Not because of the content of his posts, but because of his intentions. He's not gaming the system, he's gaming the players. And apparently, the players can't seem to figure that out.

It's quite distressing I tell you.

Just my 0.02$

Personally I never would have believed that there are people who are capable of writing coherent sentences who are at the same time so grotesquely hostile to civil discussion.  That's not a lesson I wanted to learn, but I guess it had to be learned.  

I hope we can collectively find ways to deal with it.  Thank you for providing the venue for the experiments, as well as an outlet for our writings and mutual edification from silly scribblings to cosmic contemplation.

I would refer you here, to ratings by droneckx, who has identified himself on CKX [15011] as fiveoclockcharlie

http://www.ip-wars.net/?op=user&tool=ratings&nick=fiveoclockcharlie&start=120

126) Re: PS: On Submarine Licensing [4.27], by harlan wilkerson, Rated: 1
 Posted on 12/26/2004 19:35:53 UTC
 Rated on 02/14/2005 18:04:08 UTC

[and through to:]

266) Re: Clarification [3.57], by harlan wilkerson, Rated: 1
 Posted on 02/13/2005 13:11:45 UTC
 Rated on 02/14/2005 17:14:25 UTC

All except for 2 rating Harlan at 1.

I think that 140 ratings like this, of one person in sequence, at any single value require an explanation. [OK, I have done this to magic, based on his tagline].

Obviously drone's ratings of Harlan will impact unfairly on his mojo, and I think that this should be reversed.

It's not your fault, it's your responsibility.

You project onto a large number of frankly well meaning people who are simply in disagreement with the very public statements published here and elsewhere by members of this group some kind of destructive hostility toward your project here.

"Destroying the usefulness of this site" is being very effectively acomplished from within. Until the membership decides they don't simply want a clan home where they can shout down and demean those who simply disagree, often in a more civil fashion than the tu's you'll go faster and faster toward implosion.

It's not your fault, it's your responsibility.

You project onto a large number of frankly well meaning people who are simply in disagreement with the very public statements published here and elsewhere by members of this group some kind of destructive hostility toward your project here.

"Destroying the usefulness of this site" is being very effectively acomplished from within. Until the membership decides they don't simply want a clan home where they can shout down and demean those who simply disagree, often in a more civil fashion than the tu's you'll go faster and faster toward implosion.

<<The anti F/OSS rhetoric, the universally abused rating system (yes, I played as well), the hostility, and the genuinely lowbrow undertow all are facets of why.>>

While you're doling out justice, maybe you could deal with people who consistently give 0s to anyone who they disagree with. ColonelZen has stated that he does. So has Mikey. Check out this exchange for more of the same:

http://www.ip-wars.net/comments/2005/2/22/0119/23918/6?mode=alone;showrate=1#6

I missed it. I want to read it.