Re: Just a thought...

["Eric M. Bennett" <ericb@pobox.com>]

Simon Cooke wrote:

>Simply because I want to find out what Lewis would actually give 
>someone for $100 (and he's been very careful to protect himself - 
>all he says is that it's software, so we can't get him for unfair 
>trading practices or description), I'm willing to put $10 of my own 
>money towards finding this out.
>
>Anyone want to join me? I'd rather not be the one to take the checks 
>though. All I want to know at the end of it is this...
>
>.. WHAT THE HELL'S IN THE BOX!
>
>Lewis Mettler - he may be infuriating to the extreme, but he knows 
>better than anyone else I know how to keep you in suspense.


Even Microsoft will tell you what is in its boxes without requiring 
you to raise the money to buy the product.

I already tried to get this info out of Lewis once.  You can see his 
reply here:
http://lists.essential.org/1999/am-info/msg06990.html


I made the point that if his bundle does not contain a monopoly 
product, he has no leverage over me, so I do not have to pay his 
$100, and his "bundle" does not harm me.  In his reply, he falls back 
on the assumption that the bundle must involve a monopoly product, 
despite his claim that *all* bundles harm *all* consumers.  Yet he 
won't identify the monopoly product in his own hypothetical $100 
bundle.

In other words, he answered a different challenge than the one I 
made.  Which, apparently, is just par for the course.  As far as I am 
aware (N.B. I am now ignoring his messages here) he has not yet 
explained how his bundle is harming me if it does not contain a 
monopoly product.

--
Eric Bennett / ericb@pobox.com / emb22@cornell.edu  www.pobox.com/~ericb/
Cornell University, Department of Chemistry & Chemical Biology

I have no idea what you're talking about when you say "ask".
- Bill Gates, in his deposition for the U.S. vs. Microsoft lawsuit