On Jun 22, 2011, at 1:56 PM, MB Software Solutions, LLC wrote:
>> I believe that's because Michel is too greedy. I ceased logging in to UT a
>> long while ago because if you want to search, you need to pay. What kind of
>> a forum is that? People are answering the questions and Michel is making a
>> buck out of it. WTF. I'm not going back there ever again.
>
> This is the year 2011, but I heard those same kinds of comments many
> many years ago. Legitimate, imo.
UT has had a censorship policy for over a decade. Back when I ran
Codebook support, I tried to set up an area on UT for that, but was told I
couldn't because a "competitor" (Oak Leaf) already had a paid section, and I
couldn't "compete" by offering support on a free forum. However, if I were to
upgrade to a higher paid level and could bring in more subscriber money than
Oak Leaf, he would reverse the policy.
Also, if you remember, UT claims full copyright to anything posted
there, and can use it for profit without compensating you for it. That's the
reason why when you view ProFox messages on the web, there is a clear copyright
attribution to the author of the post, not me.
I have a theory that people are so used to getting shafted by Microsoft
that UT's behavior doesn't seem all that bad. I know that no one who is used to
the free, open and honest exchange of ideas would tolerate a site like that.
Knowledge isn't a zero-sum game.
-- Ed Leafe
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message:
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/8612a3c5-dee0-4728-9378-06d7afdf3...@leafe.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
