gumby@Cygnus.COM (David Vinayak Wallace) (12/02/90)
Date: 26 Nov 90 17:24:20 GMT From: bruce@atncpc.UUCP (Bruce Henderson) The F*$%&ing lawsuits of Ashton Tate embarass and annoy the hell out of me, too. I have never claimed to speak for Ashton Tate, and they have never claimed to be acting on my behalf or with my blessing (heck, they didn't even consult me.... 8-) In the future, If you want to flame someone, it is usually useless to attack thier employer's actions, most employees could care less what the "dudes upstairs" do to amuse themselves. This is an irresponsible attitude, especially in the Valley. Were Ashton-Tate producing Napalm(tm), would a Quaker work there? If you worked in some dead-end industry like agriculture or automobiles and had to struggle to feed your family it would be one thing. But in the computer industry you may change jobs at will and work on what you want. If you work for a company who's trying to prevent that very freedom I can only assume you support their position. Sorry to come on like a flame but this sounds too much like the "good german" argument for me to take it quietly.
bruce@atncpc.UUCP (Bruce Henderson) (12/03/90)
In article <GUMBY.90Dec1213449@Cygnus.COM>, gumby@Cygnus.COM (David Vinayak Wallace) writes: > > This is an irresponsible attitude, especially in the Valley. Were > Ashton-Tate producing Napalm(tm), would a Quaker work there? > > If you worked in some dead-end industry like agriculture or > automobiles and had to struggle to feed your family it would be one > thing. But in the computer industry you may change jobs at will and > work on what you want. If you work for a company who's trying to > prevent that very freedom I can only assume you support their position. > > Sorry to come on like a flame but this sounds too much like the "good > german" argument for me to take it quietly. Look here. You may dissagree with what my company does, that is your right. You may dissagree with what I say, this is America. and free speach is what makes us great BUT I have no stomach for your racist comments! Look here, if you dislike german or polish or jewish people, that is your right too, But keep it off the Internet! And as far as your comments go. You speak from ignorance (concerning the politics internal to Ashton Tate) and should therefor be ignored Bruce
mcgrant@elaine3.stanford.edu (Michael Grant) (12/03/90)
ygnus.COM (David Vinayak Wallace) writes: > Date: 26 Nov 90 17:24:20 GMT > > In the future, If you want to flame someone, it is usually useless to > attack thier employer's actions, most employees could care less what > the "dudes upstairs" do to amuse themselves. > >This is an irresponsible attitude, especially in the Valley. Were >Ashton-Tate producing Napalm(tm), would a Quaker work there? > >Sorry to come on like a flame but this sounds too much like the "good >german" argument for me to take it quietly. Lay off. The two examples you gave are clearly questions of much more serious (i.e. life-threatening) nature. Frankly I would be quite offended to be compared to a 'good german' in this instance. The fact of the matter is that the merits of these lawsuits are more debatable than the benefits of Napalm. So, first of all, there's no moral compromise going on in this guy's case. Secondly, why don't you just face facts that paying the bills takes a little more priority in most people's minds than petty differences with their employers? How do you know that this guy WOULDN'T quit if A-T started producing assault rifles? Perhaps this lawsuit YOU think is so important isn't all that important to HIM. And he's perfectly justified in believing so. Michael C. Grant Information Systems Lab mcgrant@portia.stanford.edu
glang@Autodesk.COM (Gary Lang) (12/03/90)
>This is an irresponsible attitude, especially in the Valley. Were >Ashton-Tate producing Napalm(tm), would a Quaker work there? Perhaps, but we're talking about a business maneuver here, not production of weapons. The scale somewhat skews the comparison towards absurdity in my opinion. If some part of A-T can have the good sense to hire people to develop great software for the cube, who cares if another part of it wants to spend time and money in other ways. BTW, I was a defendant in a lawsuit by A-T once, and I fully understand why they did it and harbor no malice whatsoever about it. I'm not even convinces that they have no case in the FoxBase suit either. Check out PowerStep, it's really a great program. They manipulate 3-D images in a fashion more intuitive than most CAD packages out there. - g
cnh5730@calvin.tamu.edu (Chuck Herrick) (12/04/90)
In article <359@atncpc.UUCP> bruce@atncpc.UUCP (Bruce Henderson) writes: >this is America. and free speach >is what makes us great > >But keep it off the Internet! Bit of a contradiction in terms, eh Bruce?
poser@csli.Stanford.EDU (Bill Poser) (12/04/90)
In article <359@atncpc.UUCP> bruce@atncpc.UUCP (Bruce Henderson) writes, in reference to article <GUMBY.90Dec1213449@Cygnus.COM>: > >I have no stomach for your racist comments! Look here, if you dislike >german or polish or jewish people, that is your right too, Would you care to explain what it is that you find racist in Gumby's message? I see nothing even remotedly racist in the passage quoted. Bill Poser
gumby@Cygnus.COM (David Vinayak Wallace) (12/10/90)
It's a good thing I put flame in the subject; people who don't care
can skip this. I tried to use a euphemism to avoid hurting Mr.
Henderson's feelings but he went off the deep end. On the other hand
it did have one positive benefit. In words of few syllables:
o - If you think that Ashton Tate's lawsuits are reasonable, that's
your business. I disagree with you, but so what -- reasonable
people may disagree.
o - If you worry that Ashton Tate's lawsuits set a dangerous
precedent, then we agree.
o - But if you claim to oppose them and then tacitly go along with
them then I think you are at best a hypocrite.
If L&F lawsuits are ultimately upheld then our ability as programmers
to change jobs at will (continuing to work in the same area) will be
restricted. Again, if you think this is reasonable, that's your
business. But it's hard to claim that you are against it while you
help sustain the company. Remember the pitiful poem:
When they came for the Jews I said nothing because I was not a Jew.
When they came for the Catholics I said nothing because I was not a
Catholic.
When they came for me nobody said anything, for there was nobody left
to stop them.
I am not willing to stand by and let these companies restrict my
freedom to work on what I want -- either as a consumer or producer of
software. If you think it's reasonable, we may respectfully disagree.
But I am offended by someone's trying to duck responsibility by saying
"yes I think it's terrible but it's not my responsibility" (the exact
words, in <356@atncpc.UUCP>, were "The F*$%&ing lawsuits of Ashton
Tate embarass and annoy the hell out of me, too.") Take a real stand,
Mr Henderson, since you brought it up!
Oh, the positive benefit was due to my message provoking a much
harsher reponse from Mr. Henderson in personal mail rather than on the
net. I don't understand what, if any, relationship it has to my
missive, but at least it propounds a more firm position on SOME issue
(punctuation and spelling intact):
Date: Sun, 2 Dec 90 14:30:48 PST
From: labrea!atncpc!jupiter!bruce@apple.com (Bruce Henderson)
To: gumby@cygnus.com (David Vinayak Wallace)
Subject: lawsuit flame (Was: NeXTStep 2.0 Completed)
David,
Look
Are you some sort of racist bastard?
Do you hate Jews as well?
Your kind of cross burning , Jew killing, job descriminating attitude is exactly what makes
me want to really go out and do some damage. You can flame me and Ashton Tate all
you want, but your racist comments are not welcome
I feel that by supporting Ashton Tate you are already doing some
damage, but it is unclear to me from any of your statements whether
you feel the same. What sort of damage have you in mind?
Curious as to whither this may lead,
--dmcgrant@elaine3.stanford.edu (Michael Grant) (12/11/90)
> When they came for the Jews I said nothing because I was not a Jew. > When they came for the Catholics I said nothing because I was not a > Catholic. > When they came for me nobody said anything, for there was nobody left > to stop them. When will you get it through your thick skull that most people aren't flaming you for your opinion, but for these offensive comparisons to Nazism! I happen to agree with what you say (not completely, but somewhat), but I feel that you need to be a lot more careful in your choice of comparisons. The bottom line is how DARE you compare that guy who is working for Ashton-Tate despite his disagreements with their practies to the passive supporting citizens of Nazi Germany. That is quite offensive and insensitive--particularly in this hypersensitive time, when we have to bite our lip when we are tempted to say 'black' instead of 'african-american', 'gay' instead of 'homosexual', and so on. What you are trying to say, of course, is that people tend not to act on their beliefs until it directly affects them. But keep in mind that things are not black and white. The gentleman who works for Ashton-Tate might disagree with his management very strongly. BUT, it may not be strongly enough to quit his job. You might suggest that it is just as easy for him to find another job--PERHAPS, perhaps not, but it surely is just as easy to find a replacement for him. In his opinion, this issue is important enough only to draft a formal memo to his management, voice his concerns, and let it stand at that. If that is his reasonable judgement of the situation, then so be it. Michael C. Grant .
dlw@Atherton.COM (David Williams) (12/12/90)
Perhaps Mr. Wallace... Some might find it offensive and demeaning that you trivialize the experience that 6 million jews suffered at the hands of Nazi's during WW II by saying that Ashton-Tate's lawsuit is equivalent in scope [one can only assume this from your "good german" quote]. The metaphors of LPF & GNU supporters on "Look and Feel" lawsuits and boycotts towards the holocaust and the experiences of Blacks in South Africa, lead one to wonder just what sort of sheltered life they lead. Six million people were butchered in the holocaust. Blacks in South Africa suffer under a repressive police state, with a below poverty standard of living. Can either of these experiences be compared to the *IDEAL* or struggle you engage in for "free" software? I think not. Some might find it offensive if they happen to be of German ancestry that you use the term "good german" which equates to a Nazi your example. Some might find it offensive if they happen to be of Jewish ancestry and you use the term "good german" and apply it to them. Some might wonder why all who rabidly attack those who do not agree with the beliefs of Richard Stallman and GNU--find a *REAL* cause to work for with the same fervor. One that helps mankind, or helps to end the violence and suffering that occurs in their native society. I mean it appears to this reader of usenet news that GNU followers expend a *GREAT* deal of energy on in a manner that does not communicate with others, but rather dictates-- If you work for [fill in the blank here] you are slime... If you purchase software from [fill in the blank here] you are slime... If you purchase hardware from [fill in the blank here] you are slime... If you support patents and copyrights on software you are slime... These companies [fill in the blank here] are slime... Hardly the way to effectively communicate your views without alienating the person you supposedly are trying to engage in a dialog! Perhaps GNUbelievers ought to try and emulate what Doug Englebart is trying to do with Augment and the Bootstrap consortium....Understand WHY he embarked on his mission to help mankind improve the way we work and communicate with one another. What if GNU/LPF/FSF embraced this work! Ideals are nice things to have indeed...yet must they be expressed by constantly ATTACKING the views of those who disagree with you? It seems as if in the not too distant future one will find that every thread on usenet will find itself degenerating into a flamewar over GNU...or my computer is better than yours. David Williams
philip@pescadero.Stanford.EDU (Philip Machanick) (12/13/90)
-- Philip Machanick philip@pescadero.stanford.edu
philip@pescadero.Stanford.EDU (Philip Machanick) (12/13/90)
In article <33894@athertn.Atherton.COM>, dlw@Atherton.COM (David Williams) writes: |> [...]. The metaphors of LPF & GNU supporters on |> "Look and Feel" lawsuits and boycotts towards the holocaust and the experiences |> of Blacks in South Africa, lead one to wonder just what sort of sheltered life |> they lead. Six million people were butchered in the holocaust. Blacks in |> South Africa suffer under a repressive police state, with a below poverty |> standard of living. Can either of these experiences be compared to the *IDEAL* |> or struggle you engage in for "free" software? I think not. This is quite correct. But in defence of Richard Stallman: I met him at a conference organized by Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility, and he was most earnestly explaining the problems of copyright etc. Then he heard I was from South Africa, and immediately conceded that his problems were trivial by comparison. Nonetheless, I must agree that comparing look and feel lawsuits with situations of gross human rights abuse is over the top and does nothing to promote FSF's generally worthy case. -- Philip Machanick philip@pescadero.stanford.edu
jacob@gore.com (Jacob Gore) (12/13/90)
/comp.sys.next / philip@pescadero.Stanford.EDU (Philip Machanick) / Dec 12'90 / > Nonetheless, I must agree that comparing look and feel lawsuits with > situations of gross human rights abuse is over the top and does nothing > to promote FSF's generally worthy case. Such comparisons are not made to imply equivalence of the injustices. They are used merely because it's tempting to allude to something that everybody (well, almost everybody) agrees is bad, and argue that what you oppose is bad for similar reasons. However, this technique, despite being perfectly logical (assuming you can actualy demonstrate the analogy), never fails to draw furor from people who had suffered from the worse injustice of the two. Thus, it's best to avoid it. I'm pointing this out so that both sides of participants in this unfortunately digressing thread can give it a rest. Please! Jacob -- Jacob Gore Jacob@Gore.Com boulder!gore!jacob
edwardj@microsoft.UUCP (Edward JUNG) (12/22/90)
In article <1990Dec10.204331.7166@portia.Stanford.EDU> mcgrant@elaine3.stanford.edu (Michael Grant) writes: >The bottom line is how DARE you compare that guy who is working for >Ashton-Tate despite his disagreements with their practies to the passive >supporting citizens of Nazi Germany. That is quite offensive and >insensitive--particularly in this hypersensitive time, when we have to bite >our lip when we are tempted to say 'black' instead of 'african-american', >'gay' instead of 'homosexual', and so on. Uh, isn't that "person of color" instead of "african-american"? I think I'm losing track... ;-) -- Edward Jung Microsoft Corp. My opinions do not reflect any policy of my employer.