Re: Long rambling post (was Re: New FAQ sites?)

[sheldon@atlcom.net (Sheldon Simms)]

In article <34412F32.3D8E@library.ucla.edu>, pubpc1@library.ucla.edu wrote:

> Like I said, both of them can be jerks.  However, just because one does
> not agree with piracy, does one automatically have to support Nate's
> abuses?  Why not take a stand against both of them.

Rather than reply to individual sentences in your post, I have selected
the above as representative.

I do not support Nathan's abuses. I think he is wrong to flame people
asking questions, whether or not the information they are seeking is
in the FAQ. I think he is wrong to withhold the FAQ from the general
public. I agree that he can be quite rude and often turns people off
(or outright offends them) by his behavior.

I do support Nathan's rights. I agree that he has the right to restrict
distribution of the (his) FAQ, even though I don't think he should.

It is wrong to suggest that Nathan Mates and Charles Turley are
'equally wrong'. Nathan Mate's biggest crime is being a jerk. Charles
Turley is a liar, a software pirate, and what "feels" even worse to a
programmer, someone who takes credit he doesn't deserve (in his case,
by sector editing various programs)

I agree with your position on illegal copying of software, as you
stated it in the post to which I am responding. I do have one request
of you regarding the issue. Please explain your role in the WordPerfect
hoax. You were at the center of it and I have never heard any explanation
from you about how your "proof" that WordPerfect has been released as
freeware turned out to be so wrong, and why you refused to deal with
Joe Kohn about the issue, instead choosing to send your "proof" to
Charles Turley, when you were repeatedly warned that the Apple II
community at large could not ever trust anything he touched.

I eagerly await your response.

-- 
W. Sheldon Simms III   |   2000 is *still* the 20th century
sheldon@atlcom.net     |