content: Why do people link tripe like this?  Because linking shit coverage is better than no coverage; this is what was available. And because this is voat; the discussion and critique are as important as the article. This (shit) article quotes Torvalds, and he has a point. Voaters (like you) are smart enough to suss it out and more than willing to call out the problems with the tone and accuracy. Thank you - it is what I want and what I expect. If no one had called out this whinging idiot writer (one of many at The Register), I would have been disappointed.  And why would it be upvoated?  Upvoats happen because we find value in the content, not necessarily because we like the content (this ain''t facebook). I can hate the reportage, the political implications, the personages and still upvoat a link for social, political, cultural, or economic significance.