Once the OST spot an argument based on a study or survey, then the group or individual who did the survey or study is maligned. It is easy to find some grounds on which to malign all and sundry. If no grounds exist, then the worn-out cliche, "a survey can achieve any result provided you ask the right questions" is trotted out. Either way, the end result for the OST is the same - a sense of being right is created.

Sometimes simple name-calling is enough. Or one could always hint at the writer's perceived bias. The fact that bias - and nothing but bias - exists on the other side isn't apparent to the OST; remember, here we are dealing with the half-educated, the narrowest of the narrow-minded.

For people who belong to this breed, the adult principle of agreeing to disagree doesn't exist. By chance, if the OST happen to have any means of preventing the propagation of an opposing view, then your way will be blocked, seemingly for all the right reasons. "Unprofessional" and "unresearched" are two frequently used words. Quite often the context in which these words are used provides sufficient indication that the OST has no idea what they mean. But just try mentioning the similarities that the situation has with the way Pravda was run and you'll earn even more abuse.

The sad aspect of this phenomenon is that most of the operating systems championed by this breed do not need to be defended by any holy warriors. The technology stands well enough on its own and the OST only prevent its progress by choosing to act as uninvited advocates. But the insecure among the technology-crazy crowd need some blanket to cling to, some thumb to suck, to validate their existence. They aren't going away, not any time soon.

{moscomment}