June 21st, 2003 11:15 PM
Tedob1- I respect your opinion, but we've crossed those bridges before. It is a bullshit double-standard that if I post an article from SecurityFocus or link to a Microsoft Bulletin I am a hero, but if I link to my own original works it is against policy.
Tony ive watch you shamelessly promote yourself and your website (which by the way is against the rules here) for quite some time, but now you’ve gone too far. Your saying that you getting a case of verbal diarrhea on a web page, which none of us would see unless you post a link, is better than TigerShark writing his elected officials. That’s Bullshit!
I could care less about the AP's or lack thereof and I could care less if you don't want to visit the About.com site. You are entitled to your opinion of me and of About.com. The article was relevant to the thread and there was no reason why linking to an About.com article should carry any more or less weight than linking to SecurityFocus or any other Security site.
For the record, I certainly in no way suggested that my article was "better" than Tiger Shark writing the senator. I was simply following in his footsteps somewhat but posted it to my own site instead of to Senator Hatch's site.
FWIW- I do every chance I get. I am in contact with my representatives and senators regularly and have a good working relationship with my state senator. I not only wrote the article which I linked here, but sent the text of it and a link to it to Senator Hatch as well.
Why don’t you put that talent of yours to work and push for change (whichever way you want it) instead of repeating what many others have already said. Try writing your representatives too. I don’t think they’ve book marked your pages.
Back to the point though, the site is supposed to be for sharing knowledge and information. There are so many addicts and seniors that rarely post anything relevant. They chime in on threads about the AP system or to jump down the throat of a newbie for posting in the wrong forum. They do the occasional one line response, but very few actually start or contribute to meaningful threads.
If other members visited my site and posted a link to one of my articles would you chastise them as well? In the end, I don't really care. I will post threads I think contribute to the community. I will answer questions and share knowledge where I can. I will link to relevant resources on external sites whether they be mine or someone else's.
I do respect your opinion, but I think you are offbase on this one.
June 22nd, 2003 12:13 AM
Bukhari:V3B48N826 “The Prophet said, ‘Isn’t the witness of a woman equal to half of that of a man?’ The women said, ‘Yes.’ He said, ‘This is because of the deficiency of a woman’s mind.’”
June 23rd, 2003 03:18 AM
I can see it now.
[Setting: Big Recording Company Meeting]
[Board of Directors] How are things going with destroying copyright violators computers?
[Recording executive] Well we destroyed a couple hundred PC’s of people who were not actually violating any copyrights.
[Board of Directors] oh.
[Recording Executive] Ah yea, it seems we used a few wrong ID addresses or some technical mumbo jumbo. Anyway, we attacked the wrong computers.
[Board of Directors] oh….what happens now?
[Recording Executive] Actually nothing! A law was passed that protects us from any and all lawsuits.
[Board of Directors] Well that’s great (The room full of laughter). Meeting Adjourned!
IMHO it is a very bad idea. We cannot pass laws that let one group of people be vigilantes.
What's next? If Wallmart has reason to believe a person has stolen a pack of gum will they be lawfully able to destroy that persons home?
\"Trying to outsmart a compiler defeats much of the purpose of using one.\" — Kernighan & Plauger, The Elements of Programming Style.