What's wrong with top posting? After one has read the post a number of times
as I'm sure most of us have, it is a pain in the ass to have to scroll down
all the time to read a reply. I agree one should bottom post initially, but
after the post has been shown a number of times why continue to bottom
Hmm - I agree that theft is theft however there is more than one software
company that could be accused of stealing from it's customers . . . If I pay
for something I expect it to work as advertised or it needs to be fixed ( I
am not talking about 5-10 years from now I am talking about it having NEVER
worked correctly) - ever try to return a software package after it was
opened because it did not work as advertised - the store will not take it
back and when you read the warranty it says basically that "the program is
warranted to be copied correctly to the disc and the media will be replaced
if defective..." I am not ranting against the tech industry ( I work in
tech) since when it is asking too much to have a piece of software work as
expected (and as it has been promoted to work)?
A friend of mine works for a large famous software that shall remain
nameless but he told me how he sat in a meeting with the VP of their
division as the VP said .."f_ _ k the customers, if they don't like it f_ _
k them. . . "My friend is in the process of leaving the company . . .
Which doesn't excuse people from stealing from anyone else.
I guess that's a good reason to go with open-source software, or to at
least research what you're considering buying before you buy it then,
Well, what alternative does the retailer have? Otherwise, you'd have
people going in, opening up the packaging, making a copy, and returning
it for full credit. Can you see the obvious avenue for abuse if that
was allowed? Just like the auto parts store not taking returns on
electronic components (which can easily be fried by improper handling or
installation), there is no reason a retailer should be expected to help
someone get something they haven't paid for.
> I am not ranting against the tech industry ( I work in
What does that have to do with some guy wanting us to steal Norm's work
for him? There's bad software out there. Do your research and avoid
I don't blame him. And yet, none of that should reflect on anything
other than the company in question. Just because there are bad
producers out there doesn't justify stealing from anyone - even those
As you clearly demonstrate, expecting someone to violate the law to do
something for you. What a twit.
OK, so you are also a communist twit.
Fortunately, the thieves like you who tried to push that vision of the
Internet have been bludgeoned into submission so that the entire thing
has survived this far. Only an idiotic, communistic, twit would think
that the Internet can possibly survive without commercialism.
Enjoy your quest for someone who desires to see the economy collapse
as the amoral majority grasp greedily for what they have no right to.
"We need to make a sacrifice to the gods, find me a young virgin... oh, and
bring something to kill"
Exactly. There were clueless twits on the internet 15 years ago too;
most of them either got a clue eventually, or went away. It's always
funny when a persistantly clueless one thinks that their long presence
somehow validates their opinion.
I've monitored all your utterings since my original request for plans. It
appears many of you spend too much time sitting in front of a monitor
pontificating, rather than constructing.
The reason I wanted the plans was to assist me with my own router table. To
see if Norm had any innovative features I could adapt, I fear not the table
is very simple in concept. In fact it has features which would cause many
problems with dust accumulation around the router, possibly a fire risk with
the very fine dust from MDF. One or two mentioned if I had seen the table,
I haven't I have only seen it mentioned on the newsgroups and photo's on
BTW I have received 52 requests for copies of the plans. In view of the
strong feelings within the group and the possibility of injury to potential
builders I have decided not to forward them.
I look forward to comments
Freely sharing INFORMATION is not the same as blatantly violating
A cheap thieving twit, they're not all communists.
Commercialism has nothing to do with it, and this is not a board.
Fact is, use of the internet to vioolate intellectual property
lasws has become easier with the rise of ISPs who sell access to
the internet. Unlike the pre-commercial days, when every system
manager was held accountable for his users, today's ISPs are
only interested in avoiding liability, they don't give a damn
about the internet itself, or even their own reputation.
No doubt the internet would have survived and flourished without
commercialism. It did fine beofor commercialism. Without
it would never be as large as it is today, the web might not have
come about, but the basic internet would cerainly have survived
becuause it is so useful.
SeeAll (in dae986$plq$ firstname.lastname@example.org) said:
| I've been using the internet for 15+ years and over those years the
| web has been taken over by selfish individuals. The spirit of the
| internet is to freely share information. When you have finished
| with an item you post it for others to share. I suppose it is to
| be expected that has more and more people use the medium
| commercialism moves in. I will try other boards of which thankfully
| there are many.
Hmmm. Not much sign of sharing in the other direction since 1981. Mind
DeSoto, Iowa USA
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.