Let me re-introduce myself: I'm a poisonous character spreading false rumours.

Went looking for Boycott Novell tonight to see what Libelous Ranger Roy Schestowitz was writing about and found this when I hit the URL:

Technical difficulties? Really?!?!? Who'd of thought such a blazing beacon of truth would be taken down by something as mundane as "technical difficulties"?

It appears that the hosting site, Net-Profits.com, is still up and running with a three-month-old site status posting:
The website is under development for the New Net-Prophets.com, focusing on being an incubator for Open Source and Free Software projects and websites.
Whatever that means.

The only decent live link seems to be to EDU-Nix.org, the open source educational distro produced and managed by Shane Coyle. That's right, the same Shane Coyle who helped to co-found Boycott Novell, and whose name was taken off the Boycott Novell masthead leaving just Little Roy Schestowitz and his venomous hate-filled screed against anyone and anything that crossed his path or dared to speak out against him and his personal crusade.

I hope it's gone. But I'm afraid it isn't, and that it'll just turn up somewhere else in an even more poisonous and virulent form.


No sooner did I post this and check yet again just to make absolutely sure BN was gone, than the site re-appeared in all it's fabulous glory. Little Roy Schestowitz is back as you can see below.

Oh well.

Update 2 (Feb 1)

More "technical difficulties" for Boycott Novell. Apparently someone is trying to migrate to Wordpress. And left the front door unlocked, so to speak. Lets have some fun, shall we?

Ah. Database connectivity issues. Too bad, so sad. Well, here's hoping that whomever is responsible for this most-public mess can clean it up. Wouldn't want to deprive the world of the glorious truths unearthed by the tireless investigative efforts of Boycott Novell, now would we?

Update 3

We still have our little database issues, don't we?

Perhaps this might help?

Update 4

I changed the title of the post based on this little nugget buried in Little Roy Schestowitz's blog [sic]:
We were not able to cope with the load yesterday and the server/account needed to be downed for several hours. We did use distributed cache, but this was not enough. The server received more requests than it could cope with.

This is worth pointing out because poisonous characters spread false rumours and accusations w.r.t. reasons of downtime.
I guess his hand-me-down Speccy finally broke down for good. Or maybe it's just good old fashioned operator incompetence. You know, the kind that produces outrageously false reporting and libelous editorializing.

Update 5 (Feb 2, As Our Melodrama Unfolds...)

As we return to Boycott Novell, we find Little Roy Schestowitz lamenting his Job-like trials at the hands of the cruel Internets Fates. Shane Coyle, original co-founder and former masthead resident, deigns to drop a few pearls of wisdom into the midst of Schestowitz's suffering and lamentations. Oh, how delightfully catty!
(SHANE - since I can’t comment)

Well, I have reseller-level access, so if there is something you cannot do in your login, let me know. As far as a solution, besides caching and taking the load off of mysql to serve the same page over and over again during a slashdotting, if you want to move the site to another host it’s fine by me - that would solve the whole ads problem, too.
Yes Little Roy Schestowitz, don't let the door hit you on your fanny on the way out.

Final Update (Feb 2)

I guess I should have grabbed a screen capture and posted it here. Little Roy has managed to clean off all comments regarding his upgrade, including Shane's. The only record of Little Roy's debacle is what's here.


  1. Speaking of "libelous" bloggers, I notice that you still have the following post on your blog:
    wherein you falsely accuse me of stealing your content and reposting it unattributed for no apparent reason. This despite the easily verified fact that you had been splogged.

    So I guess you and Schestowitz are peas in a pod. Kind of casts your "humorous" post title in a new light doesn't it?

  2. Thanks for that ringing recommendation, Tim. I know I can always count on you.

  3. "Thanks for that ringing recommendation, Tim. I know I can always count on you."

    And how does this address the fact that you are whining about Schestowitz being "libelous" while simultaneously being demonstrably libelous yourself?

    I am certain that any response I may get to that question will be as feebly evasive as your first one.

    Go Bill! Keep after that libelous Schestowitz!


  4. I'll let the post speak for itself. There's considerable context within the post which you conveniently ignore because it doesn't support your world view, which is, as usual, your want.

  5. As predicted, your response was indeed as feebly evasive as your first one. I'll make it simple so even you can get your head around it:

    1.) You have been libeling me for two years, claiming that I stole your content. This despite the fact that you must know by know that you were *wrong*, having had your content splogged.

    2.) I saw this post, wherein you repeatedly call another blogger "libelous", so I pointed out that you have been libeling me for two years and continue to do so.

    I don't read boycottnovell. The object of your tiny ire may very well be as libelous as you claim.

    My point is/was that I find it humorous that a guy like you who libels people, then acts insulting and evasive when they point it out, would then turn around and start whining about someone else being "libelous".

    Will your response be as completely irrelevant and tepidly insulting as your last one? Signs point to yes.

  6. You unique spin on the facts, as always, is charming and infinitely entertaining.

  7. Bill:
    "You unique spin on the facts, as always, is charming and infinitely entertaining."

    Well thanks for that Bill. I must admit that I find your desperate evasiveness entertaining as well.

    However, there is absolutely no "spin" involved in stating the following facts:

    1. You have for 2 years had an entry on this blog that libels me by falsely accusing me of stealing your content. This despite the fact that must know by now that you were mistaken.

    2. You quite obviously categorically refuse to acknowledge fact 1, as your feeble non-answers here indicate.

    3. So intellectually dishonest and crippled by cowardice are you that you would rather act like you are too stupid to understand 1 & 2 than actually address what I am saying to you.
    What are you afraid of? Why not be the big man you describe yourself as and admit that you were mistaken and remedy the situation? You haven't even attempted to counter what I am saying, instead offering irrelevant non answers.

    Perhaps that is your idea of being clever: Be demonstrably hypocritical, then when someone points out facts that irrefutably demonstrate that you are indeed intellectually dishonest and hypocritical, offer pointless non answers garnished with tepid insults and faint praise that do nothing but serve to underscore just how full of it you actually are.

    I must admit that until now I actually thought that you were simply a guy who mistakenly thought I stole his content for no apparent reason. I now know that you are a guy who, even faced with the fact that he was mistaken, would continue to knowingly libel someone and who would act like an imbecile when confronted about it.

    Oh well. Good luck with the whole evasive coward thing.


Post a Comment

All comments are checked. Comment SPAM will be blocked and deleted.

Popular Posts