Well, for someone with such a haughty disposition I didn't expect you to play the coy ingénue.
Your posts began curt,
then became biting and patronizing
and then you spiraled right down into childishness
Don't try to deceive the readers now that you have removed your utterly crass post.
I made the response where I did as I wanted readers of my previous post to easily be able to see my follow up. I'll not pursue trifles though.
I made neither claims or assertions. It would be obvious to anyone with a grasp of the English language that all I provided was purely perspective.
The Jolla project took a direction I did not like That, coupled with other directions the project has taken stifled my interest. I have similar concerns with Canonical's ventures.
and after speaking with one of the heads of the project and asking him about the position the team would take if certain powers were to request certain "features" be placed into the system (I am a security consultant and generally very fond of personal liberties and privacy - this is my main motivation for open source) I was less than thrilled with his response.
My reference to the statement a member of Jolla made is absolutely true.
Your tone is likened to the typical egos that frequent message boards. I don't know if this is your usual attitude or if your caustic reply was due to excessive enthusiasm for Jolla. If you are passionate about Jolla, please try to express it in a more peaceful manner. Adults should be able to disagree without tension. Yours is exactly the kind of retort that yields ridiculous page long quarrels.
Friends?
"okay so you've not really explained all your contentions* " - What a coy summary of your post. Completely contrived to make yourself appear level headed and courteous. Of course, after having realized that there are those who have read your posting, you decided you couldn't fully get away with that wording so you (ridiculously) added an addendum: "*Admittedly in a brief/terse way". I suppose you can continue this charade as your silly and rude post is gone now but I think the discerning sort won't be fooled.
As I said, it was more appropriate to have made the response in the on-topic thread. So your claims/assertions are all pure conjecture/speculation, nothing solid it seems.
And as for your ridiculously hollow, contrived "apology" - I receive it in the manner with which it was given. It has been a long time since I let myself be drawn in by an "Internet Ego" but I just happened to have my fill recently. Joerg, please suspend my account for a while to remind me not to feed trolls again but please quiet the troll also for the greater good. I couldn't stay my tongue once he started misrepresenting his statements and playing coy. I suppose I value integrity too much. Absolutely ridiculous and embarrassing.