Peter Nikolic wrote: > On Monday 25 December 2006 03:46, J Sloan wrote: >> Randall R Schulz wrote: >>> Can you define what you mean when you say: >>> >>> - "enough of a critical mass" >>> - "to matter" >>> - "leverage control" >>> - "onramps to the information highway" >>> - "game over" >>> - "meaningful access" >>> - "most internet content" >>> - "islands" >>> - "hopeless, irrelevant rebellion" >>> - "microsoft world" >> Sorry, but if you're going to play dumb, it would be far too tedious and >> time consuming to try and bring you up to speed. Suffice it to say there is >> apparently a huge gap between our positions. Go back to sleep... >> >> >> Joe > > > Ohhhhhhhhhh touchy are we ... ?.
Yeah, my bad - I took his reply as "I don't like what you're saying, so I'm going to pretend that I don't understand any of commonly understood terms you used, and I'm going to demand that you define everything" I admit, "go back to sleep" was uncalled for. The basic issue is whether the success of linux is assured, or whether there is yet work to be done. I think there is work to be done, and it can certainly be accomplished with the available talent of the linux community, but there is a certain wealthy corporation with access to lawmakers and key influencers, who consider it fairly important to stop linux. To ignore this fact will not make the job easier, to put it mildly. I'll probably just send Randall the definitions of those commonly used terms that he wanted via PM to avoid inflicting any more of the thread on this list. Joe -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
