Fwd: Re: Why we have Source code wasRe: [oclug] Memory Usage
quarrington.robinson at sympatico.ca
Tue Jan 23 16:46:52 EST 2001
Francis Pinteric wrote:
> Really? Or perhaps the subtle change is part of a larger conspiracy
> by the corporatists on the list who are attempting to stifle the true
> purpose of the free software movement and commercialize it to the
> detrement of society. My evangelical position is well known and
> doesn't sit well with some of the people here who pretend guru-dom
> yet are in reallity sadled with medicority and banality.
> But I'm not into conspiracy theories. How about you?
> Oh, the pain of infallibility. The pain of it all.
------ munch, to conserve bandwidth ------
Nope. Put a hold on that serving of agony. Don't think there is
necessarily any conspiracy. In the past few days (when I've jumped in on
a thread), the response/reply came just to me. I mention it FYI, and
because it puzzles me: And this time when I hit "reply", it appears that
it will go to the list (with the attendant consumption of bandwidth).
Francis, I think your evangelical position is appreciated and respected.
But worse than any suspected censorship would be if you hid your light
under a bushel! Thank you for sharing your knowledge.
David G. Robinson
Ottawa, ON, Canada
More information about the OCLUG