Roger Markus wrote:
So - Rod - you're a politician then! Cool moves my friend!
ROTFL :) Salesman, actually. I've sold cars and ran a Radio Shack store
for a while.
1) Compliment your opponent ("Interesting") and make them feel at ease by
saying that you agree with them ("I agree with you").
I *really* do agree with your assessment of Microsoft as a corporate
citizen; I'm not just saying that.
At the same time, I think it's only fair to point out that they've done
what they've done because our culture and our laws have allowed it to
happen. Keep in mind that the executives and board of directors of *any*
publicly held, for-profit, company have a *legal duty* to maximize the
return to the shareholders. They can be sued by the shareholders if they
don't. So viewed in that light, are their actions any surprise?
To the extent that they've actually broken the law -- and they have in
my opinion -- they should be, or more to the point, should have been
punished. But thanks largely to Republican politicians they got let off
the hook.
2) Use their first name (oftentimes this is step #1) to show surface
friendliness and underlying superiority - as in a superior talking in a
friendly way to a wayward underling.
Or I *could* have really been trying to keep in friendly. Even the
people here that I sometimes disagree with, like Ian and Daniel, I
consider on-line friends. And I use their first names all the time.
3) Ease into the attack by criticizing a point the opponent made - not the
substance mind you, but a detail that clouds the real issue. Some call it
smoke-screening.
Hardly a detail; you made two points: Microsoft sucks and their products
suck. I agree with the first and disagree with the second.
4) Launch the most potent attack at the end - while the opponent still
thinks they're taking part in a rational discussion and is not prepared for
the sudden thrust of the knife.
I've never been accused of possessing a "cutting wit", but thanks. :)
Good show Rod! You would fit right in within the worst jungles! (Probably
you're already there. What's the body count so far?)
I'm a pussy-cat, really. Small house variety, maybe a calico.
Oh - by the way. I'm not "dead-wrong" (dated expression - can't you do any
better?) about Microsoft software being really lousy and that many people
use it the same way they buy designer clothes - not because they know what
they're doing, but because it's what they perceive to be the "correct" thing
to do to please those in power and to show their friends that they're one of
them.
Actually the main reason they use it is because it either came
pre-installed on their computer or they don't realize there are viable
alternatives. Anymore, it's just assumed that you use it. I'd say that
using Microsoft products has about the same cache as owning a
cell-phone. Not much now, but at one time it may have.
It's a reason - a pathetic reason - but a reason nevertheless.
That's what the "shiny boxes" part was about Rod, not actual boxes sitting
in your hands, but shiny boxes that you may have seen on store shelves,
advertising, etc....
RM
Yeah, I got that part. Are you always this insulting to anyone that
disagrees with you?
--
Rod
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
