On 06/09/06, White Hat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

--- Jeff Rollin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On 06/09/06, White Hat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> > --- Jeff Rollin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > On 06/09/06, White Hat
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- Freminlins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On 06/09/06, White Hat
> > > > > wrote:


> > > > Immaterial. the singularly most important
> > > > feature is suitability to task. If it is free
>  > > > > and it does not work, what good is it?
> > >
> > > In what way does it "not work"? It's enough for
> > > many people, so why should they pay more?
> >
> > I never said that anyone should pay more. I simply
> > said that it was not suitable for the tasks that
> > both I, and primarily my wife, use it for.
> No, you said "it does not work." It's up there in
> black and white.
> Again, the price

The inference was if the object is not suitable for a
designated task, then it is not a viable option.
Hence, it doesn't work. I had thought that was
obvious. The inference was certainly there. I did not
spell it out since this is a forum and I had no
inclination to turn this into a thesis. However, it is
also obvious that price is your determining factor.
Nothing wrong with that as long as it is declared up

There was no such inference.


> > > That's a good idea. And I should be able to
> procure
> > > products and settle
> > > scores anyway I want without government
> > > intervention, too. </sarcasm>
> >
> > Way out of line.
> Not out of line. Thee are many, many examples of
> companies already getting away with breaking the few
> rules that are there: why should those rules be
> relaxed so that they get away with even MORE at the
> expense of the buyer?
> No where did I even suggest the idea of retribution.
> Nor did I, as I noted, that was sarcasm.

Labeling it as sarcasm does not change the fact that
it was exactly what you meant.

I think I'm much more qualified than you to decide what I meant.

If I wear a T-shirt
that has emblazoned on it: "touch me an I will kill
you", and someone actually touched me and I make good
on the treat, I cannot claim that they were
forewarned. By the way, what bothers you so much
regarding free enterprise, with the possible exception
that you are not experiencing any monetary rewards
from it?

Free enterprise does not bother me. Lies and illegal practices do.

personally I detest what many corporations proceed to
do. However, it is their money and they have that
right. If you don't like their product, either ignore
it or make a better one.

They do not have the right to break the law

Bitching is for losers

Funny you should say that, given your contributions to this thread.

Jeff Rollin

Proud Linux user since 1998
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Reply via email to