Subject: Re: Harlequin vs. Allegro
From: Erik Naggum <>
Date: 1998/06/29
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Message-ID: <>

* Zeno the Anonymous Poster
| My comments were in response to Erik saying that it was impossible to be
| concerned with MS business ethics without being associated with other
| things considered impossible, impractical, or insane, such as
| high-quality software, communism, or anti-innovation.  I am quite sure
| that Erik doesn't think that high-quality software is impossible,
| impractical, or insane, and I took his statements to mean that neither
| are his other two examples, communism and anti-innovation.
| I don't know if you really are interested or if your statement was
| rhetorical, but my definition of communism is that it is a belief that
| "From each according to ability, and to each according to need," will
| work.  This, I was taught in school, is the most basic of definitions of
| communism, and it precludes anyone making vast amounts more of money than
| others simply because they have the ability to do so.  Erik's reference
| to communism in the same example as high-quality software, along with
| incessant repetition about the amount of money Bill Gates earns, leads me
| further to believing that he was speaking of communism as something not
| impossible, impractical, or insane.

  you seem to need the word "respectively" in order to make three things
  match three other things.  let's try this again for improved legitibility:

      Microsoft is so good at turning off the alarm clock that it has
      become impossible to be concerned about their business ethics without
      being associated with something the tacit assumptions elsewhere say
      is "impossible" or "impractical" or "insane", like high quality
      software, communism, or anti-innovation, RESPECTIVELY.

  let me know if you need further improvements in order to understand it.

-- is about my spam protection scheme and how
  to guarantee that you reach me.  in brief: if you reply to a news article
  of mine, be sure to include an In-Reply-To or References header with the
  message-ID of that message in it.  otherwise, you need to read that page.