Linux-Advocacy Digest #269, Volume #27 Fri, 23 Jun 00 01:13:03 EDT
Contents:
Re: Anti-Human Libertarians Oppose Microsoft Antitrust Action (was: (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Anti-Human Libertarians Oppose Microsoft Antitrust Action (was: (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Anti-Human Libertarians Oppose Microsoft Antitrust Action (was: (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Anti-Human Libertarians Oppose Microsoft Antitrust Action (was: (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Microsoft Ruling Too Harsh (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Microsoft Ruling Too Harsh (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: vote on MS split-up (R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ))
Re: Microsoft Ruling Too Harsh (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Microsoft Ruling Too Harsh (Aaron Kulkis)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.economics,alt.society.liberalism
Subject: Re: Anti-Human Libertarians Oppose Microsoft Antitrust Action (was:
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 00:42:38 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
z wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark S. Bilk) wrote:
>
> >Microsoft's practice, as a monopoly, of denying computer
> >vendors the ability to sell Windows, if they sold any other
> >operating system too, is an outrageous and illegal restraint
> >of free trade.
>
> Hmm ... you know, I don't recall any Ford dealer
> that sells new Chevys too. Could it be that MS
> was simply following a common business practice ?
They are rather common in Detroit.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.economics,alt.society.liberalism
Subject: Re: Anti-Human Libertarians Oppose Microsoft Antitrust Action (was:
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 00:44:02 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Curt Howland wrote:
>
> I am reminded of a recent article pointing out that IBM and Dell are
> "cooperating" to sell pre-packaged Linux machines that come with
> support.
>
> Isn't that exactly what Microsoft was prosecuted for? Negotiating with
> hardware vendors to pre-package their software?
Do the hardware vendors get penalized for offering competing products?
If not, then your analogy shatters into a billion worthless pieces.
>
> Get real. The entire prosecution was contrived from the start. No one
> was ever forced to use a Microsoft product, unlike the forced used to
> support NASA for instance.
>
> Curt-
>
> Henry Blaskowski wrote:
> >
> > In talk.politics.libertarian Mark S. Bilk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Hmm ... you know, I don't recall any Ford dealer
> > >> that sells new Chevys too. Could it be that MS
> > >> was simply following a common business practice ?
> >
> > > These are computer *hardware* vendors being coerced, not
> > > Microsoft Software stores.
> >
> > > That's illegal, and with good reason.
> >
> > What reason? What coercion? Being offered a discount is coercion?
> > I'll remember that next time I'm at the grocery store.
>
> --
> "Wherever I go, everyone is a little bit safer because I am there.
> Wherever I am, anyone in need has a friend.
> Whenever I return home, everyone is happy I am there."
> ---The Warrior Creed, Robert L. Humphrey, USMC
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.economics,alt.society.liberalism
Subject: Re: Anti-Human Libertarians Oppose Microsoft Antitrust Action (was:
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 00:45:23 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Henry Blaskowski wrote:
>
> In talk.politics.libertarian Mark S. Bilk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Later in this thread, this poster identifies the source of
> > "The New Trustbusters" as the so-called "Reason" magazine,
> > a (Right-wing) Libertarian publication that defends unregu-
> > lated Capitalism without regard to the harm it does to most
> > of the population.
>
> That's a pretty funny description of the magazine. You should
> try reading it sometime, and see what it's really about.
>
> >>the charge was changing with time.
>
> > That's because the coercive, fraudulent, illegal practices
> > of Microsoft were gradually being identified.
>
> No, it's because the case was incoherent, and they had to find
> one that would fly politically.
>
> >>In general I think it is just result of vague
> >>feeling "we have to punish MS for something, even though we don't
> >>know exactly what it is"
>
> > Microsoft's practice, as a monopoly, of denying computer
> > vendors the ability to sell Windows, if they sold any other
> > operating system too, is an outrageous and illegal restraint
> > of free trade.
>
> Sigh.... MS did not deny ANYONE the right to sell Windows, ever.
> They wanted people to sell copies, since that is a big part of
> how they make money. What they did do was offer discounts in
> exchange for certain terms. I have yet to see a description
Evidenly, you're fucking blind as a bat.
> of why this should be a federal crime, and furthermore, how this
> differs from every other business from grocery stores to steel
> mills.
>
> > Reason magazine's website says they get
> > half their income from private donors whose identities they
> > keep secret.
>
> That's so psychos like you won't stalk them :-)
>
> > The *actual result* of this maldistribution of wealth is
> > starvation, sickness, and death for many poor people under
> > Capitalism.
>
> Yes, I know some of you would prefer to see the equal distribution
> of poverty that occurs in countries that try to create a uniform
> society, but in the US we think that is sick and cruel.
>
> > Mark K, I don't mean to attack you personally, especially
> > seeing as you're posting from Poland. But in Russia they
> > are finding that unregulated Capitalism is worse for people
> > economically than Communism. Both of these systems are
> > coercive and cruel. Social Democracy is much better.
>
> You know nothing about Russia, apparently. Capitalism requires
> Rule of Law, and Russia does not have it. They have mob violence.
> Don't pretend the two are the same. You'll just look silly
> and uninformed.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.economics,alt.society.liberalism
Subject: Re: Anti-Human Libertarians Oppose Microsoft Antitrust Action (was:
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 00:49:58 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Mark S. Bilk" wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> MK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>That would include... forcing vendors to charg a customer for your
> >>product even when they purchase from the competition instead.
> >>
> >>There's a REASON that Microsoft is in court.
> >
> >As the author of "The New Trustbusters" soberly pointed,
>
> Later in this thread, this poster identifies the source of
> "The New Trustbusters" as the so-called "Reason" magazine,
> a (Right-wing) Libertarian publication that defends unregu-
> lated Capitalism without regard to the harm it does to most
> of the population.
>
> >the charge was changing with time.
>
> That's because the coercive, fraudulent, illegal practices
> of Microsoft were gradually being identified.
>
> >In general I think it is just result of vague
> >feeling "we have to punish MS for something, even though we don't
> >know exactly what it is"
>
> Microsoft's practice, as a monopoly, of denying computer
> vendors the ability to sell Windows, if they sold any other
> operating system too, is an outrageous and illegal restraint
> of free trade.
>
> That's not "vague" at all, is it?
>
> However, Libertarians, including (un)Reason magazine, don't
> care. They're in the business of justifying anything that big
> business does. (Un)Reason magazine's website says they get
> half their income from private donors whose identities they
> keep secret.
>
> Since the magazine constantly prints propaganda saying that
> employers should be allowed to pay their employees as little
> as they can get away with, and that government shouldn't tax
> wealthy people to provide services like education, healthcare,
> housing, etc., for hard-working people who aren't paid enough
> to afford them, as well as propaganda saying that wealthy
> people who own businesses should not be prevented from spewing
> poisons into the environment, nor from selling dangerous and
> fraudulent products, who do you suppose contributes the secret
> support that keeps the magazine in business?
>
> >Equality requires slavery.
>
> Right-wing Libertarian bullshit. It's slavery to rob
> employees of a large portion of the value they produce, and
> thus pay them low salaries, while the wealthy owners and
> executives are paid 1,000 or 500,000 times as much, for
> the same number of hours work per day. Yet the alleged
> "right" of business owners to do this is the central policy
> of Libertarianism.
>
> That's why Libertarianism is anti-human.
>
> Belief in Libertarianism requires turning a blind eye to
> the factual evidence of harm caused by grossly unequal
> distribution of wealth among people who all work hard.
>
> The *actual result* of this maldistribution of wealth is
> starvation, sickness, and death for many poor people under
> Capitalism.
>
> Mark K, I don't mean to attack you personally, especially
> seeing as you're posting from Poland. But in Russia they
> are finding that unregulated Capitalism is worse for people
> economically than Communism. Both of these systems are
> coercive and cruel. Social Democracy is much better.
I have been in Russia three times.
What they have is NOT capitalism. It is the newest form of
communis (perestroika means "restructuring"...and that is exactly
what they did...the RESTRUCTURED COMMUNISM), wherein they pass out
all of the economic goodies to a few party insiders (recall the
child's nursery rhyme about "Little Jack Horner" pulling out a
plum. This is a reference to an actual historical event in which
a certain John Horner was given a lot of valuable properties for
pennies on the pound.)....they call this "robber baron" economy
capitalism... and yet, they tie up the ordinary person in a sea
of red tape to keep them from starting any competing businesses.
>
> http://www.deja.com/=dnc/[ST_rn=ps]/getdoc.xp?AN=618537352
>
> Links To Reality
> http://www.aliveness.com/msb.html
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.economics
Subject: Re: Microsoft Ruling Too Harsh
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 00:52:09 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Joseph T. Adams" wrote:
>
> Liberty requires freedom from the initiation of force and fraud.
>
> It seems very clear that Microsoft has committed fraud against
> competitors, customers, and end users alike. (Examples abound in the
> Findings of Fact, and I won't rehash them here.) Fraud consists simply
> of making false claims for financial or other advantage. It is not
> compatible with the notion of free markets, which require the freedom
> on the part of both buyer and seller to give *informed* consent and to
> enter into transactions that each side reasonably believes to be to
> its benefit.
>
> In light of this, it is hard to see why so many alleged libertarians
> are willing to exonerate Microsoft. If you're willing to let a
Because, do to the non-disclosure aspects of the contracts, very
few people have yet to learn how Microsoft was defrauding end users.
OEM's weren't allowed to talk about it prior to the contracts
being subpenoaed.
> Microsoft, or any other entity, initiate fraud against other persons
> or entities with impunity, you can't pretend to be a supporter of free
> markets or of freedom in general. It's a self-contradictory position.
>
Precisely why I, as a support of free markets, want to see Microsoft
destroyed.
Gates should be in jail for racketeering.
> Joe
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.economics
Subject: Re: Microsoft Ruling Too Harsh
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 00:56:14 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Henry Blaskowski wrote:
>
> In talk.politics.libertarian Joseph T. Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Liberty requires freedom from the initiation of force and fraud.
>
> > It seems very clear that Microsoft has committed fraud against
> > competitors, customers, and end users alike. (Examples abound in the
>
> I know you think this an obvious fact, but I have yet to see anything
> that MS did that differs significantly from what every other
> successful business in the US does. Feel free to 'rehash' this
> issue, since it has never been 'hashed' in the first place.
Try reading Judge Jackson's (a free market type himself) Findings
of Fact. Try reading the contracts submitted as evidence, particularly
the Per CPU License Fees scheme, where end users were charged for
Microsoft products REGARDLESS of whether they wanted it or not.
This created SEVERE economic hardship upon ANYONE trying to sell
competing products...becuase even if you bought DR-DOS rather than
MS-DOS, you still paid $100 to Microsoft, and even if you bought
Corel Office, you were STILL charged for Microsoft office.
Thus, buying two LOWER-PRICED software packages, the end user
was charged several hundred dollars MORE.
And you don't see the fucking problem?????
What kind of fucking moron are you???
Answer the question, you idiot!
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
------------------------------
From: R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: vote on MS split-up
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 04:51:08 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> void wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 15 Jun 2000 01:40:54 GMT, R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard )
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > >The court must weigh the interests
> > > of the majority (Microsoft users)
> > >against the interests of the minority (Linux users).
> >
> > I don't agree. I think that users
> > of MS software suffer from MS'
> > malfeasance as much as anyone else does.
> > Though they don't always know
> > it, due to lack of exposure to alternatives.
>
> In fact, in Judge Jackson's latest release, he EXPLICITLY states that
> M$'s behavior has harmed M$ users.
It's probably true. If M$ users were given the choice between spending
an amout equivalent equal 20% of their salary on Microsoft mandated
hardware and software upgrades while they receive 4% raises, or
spending 4% on Linux upgrades while getting 10% raises, guess which
one they would choose. I don't think 60% would be saying "I want
the Microsoft Solution".
If employers had actual records of the amount of time actually spent
recovering from Microsoft system failures and the amount of time
spent trying to support Microsoft's constantly shifting standards,
and had the option of a standards based system in which backward
compatibility is a key strategy and reliability is crucial for
workstations as well as for servers, they would be demanding
dual-boot systems and pushing staff toward Linux and UNIX.
If investors realised that Microsoft technology was shaving as much
as 20% off their EPS, would they be so thrilled to invest in
Microsoft dominated companies who blindly follow and depend on
Microsoft technologies?
If investors realized that most of the most successful and profitable
Internet sites and providers were using UNIX and/or Linux and Open
Source software and almost no Microsoft technology, would they be
so eager to persue Microsoft technology for their web sites?
Microsoft just announced their new "Next Generation" technologies,
primarily based on using Microsoft Windows with tightly integrated
web browser connected to "servers". Ironically, this is exactly what
Linux and UNIX have always been.
> > --
> > Ben
> > 220 go.ahead.make.my.day ESMTP Postfix
>
> --
> Aaron R. Kulkis
> Unix Systems Engineer
> ICQ # 3056642
--
Rex Ballard - Open Source Advocate, Internet
I/T Architect, MIS Director
http://www.open4success.com
Linux - 90 million satisfied users worldwide
and growing at over 5%/month!
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.economics
Subject: Re: Microsoft Ruling Too Harsh
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 01:01:48 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On 22 Jun 2000 21:53:42 GMT, Henry Blaskowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >In talk.politics.libertarian Joseph T. Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> Liberty requires freedom from the initiation of force and fraud.
> >
> >> It seems very clear that Microsoft has committed fraud against
> >> competitors, customers, and end users alike. (Examples abound in the
> >
> >I know you think this an obvious fact, but I have yet to see anything
> >that MS did that differs significantly from what every other
> >successful business in the US does. Feel free to 'rehash' this
>
> Who else has been able to effect end user choice on such
> a wide scale? Who else has such an "essential facility"
> such that they could get away with such a thing. The
> practical realities of compatible communciations
> mechanisms make Microsoft's position quite different than
> the vast majority of businesses with the exception of a
> few that are either heavily regulated as accepted monopolies
> or a few that are undergoing the same prosecution as MS is.
Wrong. There are open standards, which have traditionally PRECEDED
their use in business, whcih have always been at the forefront of
technology.
Microsoft has sought to SUBVERT those standards at every opportunity,
so that they can consistently fuck over the user base.
Case in point: Word95 -> Word98.
There were ZERO formatting improvements between the two products,
yet Word95 software cannot read the default filestructure of a Word98
document.
And you alledge that consumers are not harmed by Microsoft's business
practices.
YOU ARE A FUCKING MORON!
>
> >issue, since it has never been 'hashed' in the first place.
> >
> >> compatible with the notion of free markets, which require the freedom
> >> on the part of both buyer and seller to give *informed* consent and to
> >> enter into transactions that each side reasonably believes to be to
> >> its benefit.
> >
> >This is a new claim. Are you saying that Dell didn't know what
> >Microsoft was offering? That their lawyers couldn't figure out
> >the terms of the deal? Do you have evidence of this?
>
> It would be more accurate to call what Microsoft did extortion.
Which is illegal
And when practiced by a business, is called RACKETEERING.
> They exploited the inherent qualities of software to pressure
> those that did not act as they wanted. This makes Microsoft's
> position rather unusual.
No, it just makes them a bunch of common hoods engaging in racketeering.
>
> >
> >> In light of this, it is hard to see why so many alleged libertarians
> >> are willing to exonerate Microsoft. If you're willing to let a
> >> Microsoft, or any other entity, initiate fraud against other persons
> >> or entities with impunity, you can't pretend to be a supporter of free
> >> markets or of freedom in general. It's a self-contradictory position.
> >
> >Because it's not fraud. MS customer's knew exactly what they were
> >getting. That's not fraud.
>
> They did after enough people actually bought the product and were
> able to communicate amongst themselves what it was that Microsoft
> had actually produced. The fact remains that Microsoft quite often
> promises and doesn't quite deliver.
>
> Although, any of that is really PR after the fact to deflect attention
> from the fact that for most users the purchase of Microsoft was never
> a choice. It was either the only option available or one necessary to
> ensure the ability to effectively compute due to network effects.
>
> --
>
> |||
> / | \
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.economics
Subject: Re: Microsoft Ruling Too Harsh
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 01:03:12 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Henry Blaskowski wrote:
>
> In talk.politics.libertarian Joseph T. Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I will concede that many other large corporations in the U.S. as well
> > as the government itself practice fraud with impunity; however, the
> > wrongful actions of one entity do not justify those of another.
>
> So do you think that business in the US should just be shut down,
> destroying the economy? Because that is the result of a fair
> implementation of the policy that is being used to harass MS.
By your logic, the Bootlegging gangs should have been allowed to
continuing their campaign of racketeering unchecked.
Criminal organizations should be prosecuted to the full extent of the
law.
Why do you disagree with this?
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.advocacy) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
