webber@brandx.rutgers.edu.UUCP (10/09/87)
In article <203@papaya.bbn.com>, rsalz@bbn.com (Rich Salz) writes: > In alt.sources (<246@ddsw1.UUCP>), ringwld!jmturn@CCA.CCA.COM (James M. Turner) writes: > XCopyright (c) 1986, Pipe Dream Associates > X > XFRED is shareware, Pipe Dream Associates retains any and all > Xcopyrights to this software. It may be copied or uploaded so > Xlong as no attempt is made to charge for it. > X > XFRED represents a great deal of work on my part, over a year of > Xdevelopment. I have no real desire to market this as a product, but > Xif you find FRED useful, you might see your way to send me something > Xto recompense this development time. > > Sigh. You could argue that as moderator of comp.sources.unix I have an > axe to grind, but I really hate people using the net to post shareware; > my phone is being used to help you get money (yes, BBN has UUCP links :-). I agree with you 100%. This is blatent commercial usage of the net (as well as attempted emotional blackmail for those of you who remember net.singles a few years back). A much bigger threat to the net than even the backbone. I wonder if they count the net as part of the ``underground economy'' in all of those statistics you see. > Sorry to post this here; do we need an alt.sources.d? No, but you should have considered doing what I am doing, i.e., cross-posting to alt.flame with a redirection of followups into alt.flame. This should improve the contents of both alt.sources and alt.flame. ------- BOB (webber@aramis.rutgers.edu ; rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!webber) p.s., ever wonder why alt.sources is plural but alt.flame is singular??