[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: HOTMAIL on a linux list ???!!#***###



* ben (benfoley@rcn.com) [020601 00:06]:
> On Friday 31 May 2002 11:07 pm, Vineet Kumar wrote:
> > * Arthur Dent (arthur_dent5@hotmail.com) [020531 02:46]:
> > > I know I loathe getting microsofts advertising delivered to me from other
> > > people so dont like spreading the virus myself.
> >
> > So why do you use it at all? Even without directly paying them any
> > revenues out of your own pocket, every time you use one of their
> > products, you support the evil empire's monopoly.
> >
> > bad times!
> >
> 
> back off, vineet. arthur's doing the best he can. in light of the reaction to 

No offense intended, and even re-reading my post I don't think it was
hostile, but in any case, I acknowledge that the sentiment interpreted
by the reader is more important than is the sentiment intended by the
author, and I apologize for any unintended ills.

I only wanted to point out that many people don't realize that the
microsoft monopoly thrives on its users being locked in to using
microsoft products. I often hear people claiming that they are in some
way sticking it to Bill by pirating his operating system and office
suite without paying him a dime. What they don't realize is that the
dime is less important than the fact that they'll be trading data in
proprietary word documents, thus promoting the monopoly. The hotmail
case is similar -- though users are not paying microsoft, they still
support it.

I do appreciate the step that Arthur is making, and I hoped to urge him
to completely walk away in the direction of that first step!

> a recent thread regarding a consultant looking for people with debian skills, 
> your sig could be interpreted as an ad, in which case you'd be up to your 
> indignation in debt at $1000 a pop.

I'm not sure what you're getting at here. I have been following the
thread in question, but I think that no reasonable person would construe
my posts here as any form of advertising. By that logic, anyone with an
URL in their .sig is advertising. My sig is short by anyone's standards
and unintrusive, and I put effort into making my each of my posts to
this list on-topic, accurate, helpful, and (usually) polite. If I've
ever missed the mark on any of those, my sights certainly haven't been
cockeyed enough to be considered spam. If I am mistaken and my .sig is
so wretched that it outweighs the benefit of my posts here, please let
me know (anyone, really), and I'll either change it or unsubscribe
(haven't decided yet). 

good times,
Vineet
-- 
Currently seeking opportunities in the SF Bay Area
Please see http://www.doorstop.net/resume.shtml

Attachment: pgphNWDsfdURo.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: