Re: one of the many reasons why removing non-free is a dumb idea
On Tue, Jan 06, 2004 at 06:06:35PM +1100, Anand Kumria wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 06, 2004 at 01:51:24AM +0000, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > While "Don't respond to Craig Sanders" is usually a good idea, I feel
> > compelled to point out to anybody casually watching that the parent
> > post is pure FUD; read it with a critical mind and you should find the
> > flaws. The first paragraph, for example, is entirely delusional.
>
> Well I, for one, look forward to your pointing out those delusions one
> by one. Otherwise I'm compelled to believe that Craig is largely correct.
His very first paragraph ascribes a belief to every last one of the
non-free removal supports which I believe few, if any, have ever
actually held. I have already pointed out that. How do you expect the
message to be taken seriously after that?
Reply to: