Re: David Sarna-Microsoft Regional Director

["Kendall G. Clark" <kclark@computek.net>]

  On Mon, 10 Nov 1997, Edmond Jane wrote:
  
  >To all participants on this list:
  >
  >"ObjectSoft Corporation is in the business of providing information and
  >transaction-based services using proprietary software and
  >off-the-shelf, reusable software components based on Microsoft's
  >ActiveX� (formerly OLE) component technology." 
  >
  >Considering the number of posts that Mr. Sarna is making to this list,
  >I wonder how he has any time to run his company. It would seem that he
  >spends all day every day reading all the postings and writing his
  >emails. Could it be, perhaps, that Microsoft is PAYING him to flood
  >this list with his email, which of late consists of noting but flames
  >toward the other writers who have been posting the truth about
  >Microsoft? After all, wouldn't the parent company (Microsoft) expect
  >one of their Regional Director companies to defend them in any way
  >possible against the damaging truth? Have you noticed how many times
  >Mr. Sarna has made his thinly veiled threats of LAWSUITS against those
  >who are saying the truth about Microsoft? That is the Microsoft mantra:
  >SUE, SUE, SUE.
  
  Well, I traded some email with Mr. Sarna, and he was much more restrained and
  actually polite off the list. And I don't for one minute think MS is paying
  him to flood this list. MS doesn't care about this list to any appreciable
  degree. If they're not worried about Janet Reno, the freakin' Attorney General
  of the whole damn country, why would they possibly be worried about a few
  malcontents <grin> like us?
  
  That being said, I find it interesting that Mr. Sarna denied any interest or
  purpose in defending MS on this list. Had I known that his company was a MS
  regional whatever (what is that, anyway?), and that he was the CEO of his
  company, I for one wouldn't have let him off the hook so easily.
  
  I still maintain that both Sarna and Kelly are persons with moral
  sensibilities just like the rest of us; what I find so peevish in their
  responses is that they seem unable to acknowledge that human commerce has--in
  addition to the legal and profit dimensions they seem to fixate on--a moral
  dimension as well.
  
  Again, I'll ask, not demand, for the third or fourth time:
  
  	are there any moral conditions to your support of MS?
  
  I mean religious people have already been bashed on this list, early on, for
  being irrationally devoted to the objects of their religious fervor, but many
  religious people will concede that there are conditions under which they would
  cease to be religious: for example, many Jews gave up Judaism because of the
  Holocaust. That for them was a falsifying condition of their religiousness.
  
  I'm just wandering if the devotion and loyalty to MS that has been repeatedly
  displayed on this list doesn't also have some conditions of falsifiability?
  
  Man, I thought I was loyal to Linux...but I'm Benedict Arnold compared to
  Sarna and Kelly.
  
  I know what could happen to make me quit using Linux, even if it isn't very
  likely.
  
  Wasting my time wanting an answer,
  
  	Kendall Clark