Re: Allegro CL 5.0 Win32 - Naggum cll archive

Subject: Re: Allegro CL 5.0 Win32
From: Erik Naggum <erik@naggum.no>
Date: 2000/02/25
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Message-ID: <3160483279486734@naggum.no>

* Ole Myren Rohne <ole.rohne@cern.ch>
| In the article I criticized <3160337334524020@naggum.no>, Erik Naggum had
| to omit "licensed" in order to make Zachary *sound* dishonest - that was
| my point.

  geez, talk about attributing malice to people!  get a grip on yourself.

  when a person with criminal intent asks a person who has a licensed copy
  of a program for a copy of it, does this necessarily imply that the copy
  he is asking for is licensed and legitimate or could it also imply that
  the copy will be a pirated copy, and that the only reasons to ask for the
  holder of a licensed copy are to obscure the intent and make sure he is
  himself not screwed?

  I'm inclined to believe that the best reason to explain why you think
  other people "have to" omit words and meaning is that you're so goddamn
  good at it yourself, but it reflects on yourself, not on your targets.
  you could stop doing it, you know, and actually try to make a _point_,
  instead of proving that it is legitimate for others to do what you do.

#:Erik