🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <slrn8f3le8.jit.cbbrowne@knuth.brownes.org>,
Christopher Browne <cbbrowne@hex.net> wrote:
>Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when Mark S. Bilk would say:
>>>While I think you are correct about Rex's grip on reality, trying to explain
>>>this to Mark is a bit like trying to explain to the Devil that Charles
>>>Manson is a bit antisocial.
>>
>>Robert Moir, Christopher Smith, and Steve Sheldon (who also
>>wrote an article claiming that Rex Ballard is not believable) 
>>are all totally biased pro-Microsoft propagandists, as can be 
>>seen from examining their posts in DejaNews.
>>
>>The reason these three are desperately trying to convince 
>>readers to ignore Ballard is that he provides more information 
>>about the coercive, fraudulent, and destructive tactics that 
>>Microsoft uses than anyone else posting here.  
>>
>>As to Ballard's reliability, every time I've seen his asser-
>>tions questioned, he has successfully defended them by posting 
>>lots of supportive evidence.  
>
>Any time *I've* questioned them, he has responded with "Thanks for
>helping to proof-read for me."

Other than his figures on Linux usage and its growth (which
he has explained are estimates, and discussed their basis),
and occasional misremembering of exactly who did a particular
thing (which, in any case, was done) would you please give 
some examples of major, important assertions by Ballard which 
you have shown to be false?