On Oct 19, 2007, at 10:26, Michael ODonnell wrote:
People ? I've been told that I occasionally fit into
that category, so please tally at least one exception to
your assertion, and allow me to counter with my own:
The point is if sizeof(People) 0, it's a problem.
If 98% deal with it
On Oct 17, 2007, at 22:47, Ben Scott wrote:
List Header Cancer: The disease where the Cc header in a thread
grows larger and larger as everyone who has ever participated in the
thread gets added to the Cc list by people who blindly hit Reply
All for every message they send.
Separate issue.
On Oct 19, 2007, at 00:59, Greg Rundlett wrote:
I'm just pointing out how ridiculously broken the system is,
to the point where it doesn't even benefit the biggest and most
powerful companies commensurate with the money and resources put into
the system. That you can patent a canister with a
On Friday 19 October 2007 10:26, Bill McGonigle wrote:
Sometimes it seems people get the patent for asking the question that
nobody ever thought to ask before. Once you come up with the
question, the answer is often trivial.
A physics professor once forcefully insisted that physics was
On Fri, 19 Oct 2007 09:54:41 -0400
Bill McGonigle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Oct 18, 2007, at 14:20, Chris wrote:
What is actually wrong with having the Reply To: as the list, after
all, that is where the message came from.
Messages are delivered by the list, but they come from a
Bill wrote:
people expect replies to go to the person
People ? I've been told that I occasionally fit into
that category, so please tally at least one exception to
your assertion, and allow me to counter with my own:
Mailing lists are understood to be (analogous to) meetings
conducted in a
On Oct 18, 2007, at 14:20, Chris wrote:
What is actually wrong with having the Reply To: as the list, after
all, that is where the message came from.
Messages are delivered by the list, but they come from a person. So,
people expect replies to go to the person. This expectation can lead
On 10/19/07, Greg Rundlett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against people or companies with
patents. I'm just pointing out how ridiculously broken the system is,
to the point where it doesn't even benefit the biggest and most
powerful companies commensurate with
On Oct 17, 2007, at 22:47, Greg Rundlett wrote:
Due to the patent system, the world is limited to basically two large
consumer products companies that sell coffee. Why? because canisters
come in round or square shapes (triangular being rather impractical --
although maybe there is an idea I
On 10/18/07, Bill McGonigle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Oct 17, 2007, at 22:47, Greg Rundlett wrote:
Due to the patent system, the world is limited to basically two large
consumer products companies that sell coffee. Why? because canisters
come in round or square shapes (triangular being
On 10/17/07, Ben Scott wrote:
On 10/17/07, Bill McGonigle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Additionally please send email either to the listserv or to the poster
you are replying to, but not both.
Au contraire, please send messages to both me and the mailing list.
Au contraire contraire,
On 10/18/07, Jeff Macdonald [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Au contraire contraire, please do not. Abuse of Reply All causes
List Header Cancer!
Couldn't this be solved by the list setting Reply-To: to the list?
No. Some MUAs still include all addresses if the Reply All
function is invoked.
On 10/18/07, Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10/18/07, Jeff Macdonald [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Au contraire contraire, please do not. Abuse of Reply All causes
List Header Cancer!
Couldn't this be solved by the list setting Reply-To: to the list?
No. Some MUAs still include
On 10/18/07, Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A million years ago, this list took a vote, and the harmful
faction won. I'm really uninterested in repeating the debate unless
there is significant evidence a change in opinion has occurred, and
AFAICT, no such evidence exists.
Yes, I was
On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 10:47:19PM -0400, Ben Scott wrote:
On 10/17/07, Bill McGonigle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Additionally please send email either to the listserv or to the poster
you are replying to, but not both.
Au contraire, please send messages to both me and the mailing list.
On 10/18/07, mike ledoux [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Au contraire, please send messages to both me and the mailing list.
Au contraire contraire, please do not. Abuse of Reply All causes
List Header Cancer!
Here's a solution for both of you. Use a mailer that supports
Mail-Followups-To:,
On 10/18/07, Chris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What is actually wrong with having the Reply To: as the list ...
Just a question looking for an answer, not questioning list policy
Read the links I posted in the message.
-- Ben
___
gnhlug-discuss
The fix needs to be in the list, not the reader.
--
Why does this whole conversation smell of being no more than an
annoyance? Nothing in any of this is going to please everyone, and
frankly, I like my quick *reply-all* *rant* *click send* steps
(adjusted for this argument). If CCancer is
On Thu, Oct 18, 2007 at 04:10:41PM -0400, Ben Scott wrote:
On 10/18/07, mike ledoux [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Au contraire, please send messages to both me and the mailing list.
Au contraire contraire, please do not. Abuse of Reply All causes
List Header Cancer!
Here's a solution
On Thu, 18 Oct 2007, mike ledoux wrote:
On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 10:47:19PM -0400, Ben Scott wrote:
On 10/17/07, Bill McGonigle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Additionally please send email either to the listserv or to the poster
you are replying to, but not both.
Au contraire, please
On October 18, 2007, TARogue sent me the following:
The fix needs to be in the list, not the reader.
Before there is a fix, I think there needs to be a problem. The original
complaint was that abuse of reply-to could lead to this cancer. If
people are simply smart enough to trim down their
Bill McGonigle [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
* I buy coffee from other companies that use round metal containers
(aka coffee cans)
I buy my coffee in either:
- a foil lined bag
- a cardboard coffee cup
The latter of which usually comes with some sort of completely
inadequate plastic lid, the
On 10/18/07, Bill McGonigle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Oct 17, 2007, at 22:47, Greg Rundlett wrote:
Due to the patent system, the world is limited to basically two large
consumer products companies that sell coffee. Why? because canisters
come in round or square shapes (triangular being
On 10/18/07, Paul Lussier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I buy my coffee in either:
- a foil lined bag
- a cardboard coffee cup
OK, I do the cup thing all the time, but I would think it would be
hard to drink it out of a bag...
-- Ben
___
I just wanted to add a followup here on this.
First note that the patents involved should expire in December, 2008.
But there is a more in-depth discussion that PJ had with a retired
patent attorney. Basically, I think that the reason for filing this
suit now is that, assuming the patents are
On Wed, 2007-10-17 at 08:41 -0400, Jerry Feldman wrote:
I just wanted to add a followup here on this.
First note that the patents involved should expire in December, 2008.
But there is a more in-depth discussion that PJ had with a retired
patent attorney. Basically, I think that the reason
On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 09:38:24 -0400
Alex Hewitt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One thing that annoyed me is that the lawsuit was claiming economic
damages and you find yourself wondering how much money could they be
talking about when they didn't do any of the work that led to the patent
in the
On Oct 17, 2007, at 10:40, Jerry Feldman wrote:
The issue of patent trolls is a troubling issue because there are
companies, such as IP Innovation LLC that exist simply to enforce
patents that were filed by others. I think that it may require some
patent reform legislation to fix this.
Is
On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 13:53:59 -0400
Bill McGonigle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there something inherently wrong with the business model of a
small inventor who licenses his inventions but outsources protection
prosecution?
I recognize many patent trolls don't resemble this arrangement,
On Oct 17, 2007, at 16:01, Jerry Feldman wrote:
That company at some
future time, decides to sell the patent because they may no longer be
receiving revenue from that product.
Even worse - I've licensed the patent to four companies who are using
it, and a fifth is infringing. I don't have
On 10/17/07, Bill McGonigle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Additionally please send email either to the listserv or to the poster
you are replying to, but not both.
Au contraire, please send messages to both me and the mailing list.
Au contraire contraire, please do not. Abuse of Reply All
On 10/17/07, Jerry Feldman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 13:53:59 -0400
Bill McGonigle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there something inherently wrong with the business model of a
small inventor who licenses his inventions but outsources protection
prosecution?
I recognize
On Fri, 12 Oct 2007 18:12:47 -0400
Bruce Dawson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thomas Charron wrote:
So, now that http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20071011205044141
is out there..
What are peoples thoughts on the patent in question?
Jerry,
It is curious that only Red Hat and Novell
are the plaintiffs. Why not FSF (GNOME), of X.ORG, or TrollTech (KDE
and QT).
I think you meant that Red Hat and Novell are the defendants, not the
plaintiffs, in this suit. Having a few defendants at one time is a
normal thing. You only
So, now that http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20071011205044141
is out there..
What are peoples thoughts on the patent in question?
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?u=%2Fnetahtml%2Fsrchnum.htmSect1=PTO1Sect2=HITOFFp=1r=1l=50f=Gd=PALLs1=5072412.PN.OS=PN/5072412RS=PN/5072412
Thomas Charron wrote:
So, now that http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20071011205044141
is out there..
What are peoples thoughts on the patent in question?
36 matches
Mail list logo
