or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by e_veritas

  One doesn't have to look far to see the bias in Mueller's articles. He constantly speaks of gloom and doom for Google, with virtually none of his predictions coming to fruition. Did even a single prediction/assessment that he made for the Oracle v. Google case actually happen??? According to him, Android was certain to be a  goner after the Oracle Java lawsuit. Many times, his suppositions are in stark contrast to those of the mainstream (all anti-Google..go figure),...
  I called you out for stating the article I quoted contained something it didn't. Specifically the following:     When in reality, what Google stated and was mentioned in the article was the exact OPPOSITE of your comment.     So...I'm sorry, who is the liar again jragosta?
  I'm sure the fact that they are on Google's payroll would have an impact on how the individuals comment. However, there is a very big difference between someone who receives money from Google and ALSO comments on the side, and someone who receives money for the sole reason TO comment. The former scenario is reality, but jragosta was implying the later. He has a long history of distorting truths here...
  In the supplemental disclosure, the list of individuals is preceded with the following:   "Google did not pay for comments from any of the commenters listed in this disclosure. Nor did Google cite or rely on any of these commenters in its briefing in this case."
  Where does it say in the article that "Google admits that they pay a number of people TO comment on their products"? Now you're just making stuff up....
  I only stated it for the Oracle suit because that was the context of the post I was replying to. Please take the time to read the entire chain of discussion if you would like to join...
  When has Google not been truthful?
  I agree that Mueller never lies about the facts, but his bias is clear in what he decides to leave out of his articles and the inferences and suppositions that he draws.
  Google stated:   "Neither Google nor its counsel has paid an author, journalist, commentator or blogger to report or comment on any issues in this case. And neither Google nor its counsel has been involved in any quid pro quo in exchange for coverage of or articles about the issues in this case.”   http://allthingsd.com/20120817/google-no-paid-bloggers-here-your-honor/ http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-08-17/google-says-it-didn-t-pay-bloggers-to-write-about-oracle-suit
Google explicitly stated that they do not pay any bloggers to write articles in their favor. When they added that there may be individuals who receive money from Google via other channels (e.g. AdSense), the judge asked for more details in which Google complied. Even with the more detailed report, there was nothing along the same lines as Oracle paying Mueller to write 'propaganda' for them. You suggesting otherwise is completely disingenuous....   I do agree with other...
New Posts  All Forums: