RE: $10,000 Reward

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

  On Mon, 10 Nov 1997, David E. Y. Sarna wrote:
  
  >	>>You're already connected to them in some formal way, at least
  >your >>company is
  >	>>a MS Regional Director (what is that, by the way?).
  >
  >	Developer Days is a community event sponsored by Microsoft and
  >geared towards developers who use Microsoft development tolls (as we
  >do). It has grown in the last four years from the original 4 cities to a
  >world-wide event. Each city has a Regional Director who serves without
  >pay. For more info, click on the Regional director logo on our website.
  
  It maybe the kind of event you describe. I don't know. But your leadership or
  sponsorship of it is relevant. That's my point.
  
  By the way, I am extremely skeptical that anything MS does could be as
  harmless and innocuous as you suggest, but, hell, I've been wrong before, I
  could be wrong about this too.
  
  >	I certainly agree that we have made a large investment in
  >Microsoft technology and we have a vested interest in their continued
  >good health. It also gives me an incentive to watch what goes on here
  >and to respond to the more outrageous attacks. 
  
  Then why deny that you are a self-appointed defender of MS in this context?
  It's certainly a synonym for the paragraph above that you wrote about your
  participation in this list.
  
  You are self-appointed, as you have said, because you aren't participating
  here officially, i.e., at the behest of MS. You are a defender of MS. That's
  plain to see.
  
  Why the unwillingness to concede what is obvious to everyone?
  
  >	Hey, if the only folks on this forum were Microsoft bashers it
  >would be a pretty boring forum in no time. Having some diversity of
  >opinion keeps the adrenaline flowing!
  
  Are you genetically or constitutionally or psychologically incapable of
  replacing the word 'basher' with the word 'critic'?
  
  I've given you and Kelly more respect than I personally think you deserve by
  calling you MS defenders, instead of some more perjorative appellation.
  
  Don't you think you owe the rest of us the same courtesy?
  
  By the way, while you and Kelly sometimes interject factual data into the
  discussion, I think it seems to the rest of us that you also refuse to discuss
  points that might seem damaging to MS. Do you do this on purpose or is it a
  mis-interpretation on our part? I would really like to know.
  
  If you are simply uninterested in the non-legal aspects of a MS appraisal,
  maybe you should just say so and be done with it. Then I, for one, could
  simply ignore your posts as being irrelevant to my own concerns.
  
  Best,
  
  	Kendall Clark