On Friday 12 September 2003 09:13 am, Rolf Pedersen wrote: > > My point wasn't really about whether it affected us directly. > > Obviously it won't - given that we use Cooker, I don't know if > > we'll even ever *see* the offending adverts. The point is I think > > it's a horrible way of generating revenue which is being > > introduced by stealth > > How are ads "unprofessional"? They might be an unpleasant reminder > of the stark reality that some must pay for what so many take for > free. Perhaps, if more downloaders (especially those enjoying the > apparent wherewithal to run a laptop *and* a multiprocessor desktop > ;p) would share their good fortune by supporting the Club, for > instance, rather than promulgating rationalizations for not doing > so, the ads would not be necessary.
I'm sure I'm not alone, but I sent donations before the club and was one of the first to sign up for their club. I use absolutely none of the services or rpms there. I joined as merely a way to support mandrake because I download the isos then update and run cooker daily. I try to report bugs if no one else has here and there tho my presence on this list has been discouraged by /some/. I "put up". Obviously I feel mandrake should receive revenue - no doubt. But, having our screensavers "replaced" is not right - no matter how you slice it, it's not right. "Available" or "in addition too" would be acceptable, but "replaced" has left a nasty taste in my mouth. It can not be justified no matter how many freeloaders you use as an example. -s
