On Tuesday 06 January 2004 03:12 am, smf wrote: > > Look man, smf was the one who started with the personal attacks with " > > Please > > > can you provide me with more straw man arguments though." , and "This was > > never a constructive debate. Chris likes to troll...", and "If you have > > trouble understanding..." > > Which of these phrases from your first email were part of your constructive > debate? > "totally hypocritical logic"
Is it not true that the logic of excluding an entire system because some games are still being made for that given system is contrary to current mame policy? Perhaps the policy has changed recently, I don't know if it has or not, but whatever the policy, it should be consistent. > "holyier than thou" additude This is probably not a constructive phrase. But I do think it's kind of funny that MAMEdevs frown on people for adding newer games. I don't think it would make much difference if the game is 2, 3, 4 or or even 30 years old in a court of law. If a company or organization is going to sue mame, I don't think the current three year policy is going to make them change their minds or be any more lenient. > "silly MAME politics" Yes, I think the whole thing is kind of silly. Just a matter of opinion, not a personal attack. Even if a company or organization did decide to sue MAME, they wouldn't even have a case, so the politics are pretty much pointless in my opinion. As I stated above, if a company / organization is planning on suing mame, they would do it regardless of wether or not the three year policy is in place. I highly doubt that the three year policy is making it any less likely that any legal action would take place. As well, I believe most companies / organizations already realize that emulation is not illegal in itself. This has already been proven in a court of law, and it's very difficult to reverse prior court decisions. > > >Hopefully Mike will make a web page > > If you feel so justified that this patch should be spread then why not host > it on retrogames.com? I would be glad too, there is nothing illegal about emulation source code. It's not like I would be hosting the ROMs themselves. I would probably have to get approval from atila and/or lev anyway just due to the current MAME policies, but if it's okay with them, then I would be happy to host the xmame source code patches. Feel free to continue to debate my points, but please don't resort to belittling people and/or personal attacks. Thanks. _______________________________________________ Xmame mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://toybox.twisted.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/xmame
