Quote:
Originally Posted by
GTR 
I've corrected your posts for you.
Again.

When posting on a Google forum - you betcha!
When posting on a Microsoft forum - you betcha!
When posting anywhere other than an Apple forum - very possibly, but only if that falls within the definition of being a troll.
So anyone who has an opposing viewpoint to the forum, regardless of whether they can provide valid explanations and evidence to support said viewpoint should be labelled a troll? What is the point of discussion when you are completely intolerant of opposing viewpoints? Should people post nothing but "Yes!; I agree!; Apple is clearly in the right!"?
Quote:
It has nothing to do with anybody's viewpoint.
Yet, your very definition of a troll is dependent on that person's viewpoint. As you've stated yourself:
Quote:
When posting on a Google forum - you betcha!
When posting on a Microsoft forum - you betcha!
When posting anywhere other than an Apple forum - very possibly, but only if that falls within the definition of being a troll.
So a person can post some criticism of Google on an Apple forum and not be considered a troll; yet if he posts that same exact criticism on a Google forum, he is classified as a troll. Apparently what's important to you is whether or not that person's viewpoint align with the forum.
Quote:
You may wish to research the meaning of the word 'troll' and check the posting histories of the parties I was referring to. If you feel anybody's been accused unjustly, please feel free to get back to me.
However, please note that I may not be interested when you do.

From
Wikipedia:
Quote:
In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.
So what about the posts here have been "inflammatory, extraneous, or off topic"?