[Am-info] Dishonesty in ads] - OT

[Geoffrey]

Please excuse Mike for his poor etiquette, as he seems to have responded 
to personal email and cc: the list.  For the record, I've told him I'll 
not discuss this issue any further, in personal email, yet he continues 
with two more messages to the list.  It's OT Mike, drop it.

Mike Stephen wrote:
> Well I won't fall into your name calling fits...  If you wish to drop your
> discusions please do.  I do not have time to read your accusations and
> respond in kind.  Unlike you I do not think you are an idiot, or anything
> like that.  I just think you might be blinded by your own bias.  If AT&T did
> not buy IBM's global network, please tell me who did?  And when AT&T bought
> IBM's global network please tell me that they swapped all the OS/2 servers
> out for .... What?  Did they replace all the OS/2 servers with.... NT?  (NT
> was not able to run the systems at that time).  Because you were not
> involved with AT&T and OS/2 at the time, I find it amusing that you can
> speak for the many thousands of AT&T employees.  But then I did not work for
> IBM in 1987 when OS/2 was born.  I did the beta testing for Microsoft OS/2
> back then. In 1992 I joined IBM to teach employees the use of OS/2 1.2, then
> 1.3, then 2.0.  In 1994 I left IBM.
> 
> Some of the students attending my training courses (taught with three others
> in Western Canada) were you guessed it... employees of AT&T.  But none of
> them was you.....  I think I would have remembered.
> 
> 
> 
> Oh well..  I will learn not to take heed of any of your postings.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Geoffrey" <esoteric@3times25.net>
> To: "Mike Stephen" <mikestp@telus.net>
> Sent: Monday, June 24, 2002 4:32 PM
> Subject: Re: [Am-info] Dishonesty in ads] - OT
> 
> 
> 
>>Mike Stephen wrote:
>>
>>>There is no innacuracy.  In Canada AT&T used OS/2 extensivly through the
>>>organisation.... Why do I know?  I was in the Support department of IBM
>>>
> in
> 
>>>1992-1994.  AT&T Canada was one of my clients.
>>>
>>>PS AT&T in Canada are knows to be the remnents of Rogers long distance.
>>>
>>>I was informed by my client that OS/2 was used a lot in the US
>>>
> organization
> 
>>>as well.  I imagine today it is no longer used.  It certainly was from
>>>
> 1992
> 
>>>till at least 1997...
>>>
>>Bullshit.  I'll not argue this any further with you.  You're an idiot as
>>far as I'm concerned.  You make statements you can not prove.  I've been
>>with AT&T since 1977, AT&T has never used OS/2 as an official produc, or
>>in any large capacity.  There may have been a few covert installs, but
>>nothing as you describe.
>>
>>
>>>Most corporations used OS/2 at least in some areas.
>>>
>>Now that's a useful statement, you could say that about anything.  Most
>>corporations used paper clips at least in some areas...  That was a
>>waste of bits...
>>
>>
>>>Seems to be a petty point on your part....  However I really don't care
>>>
> what
> 
>>>you think of OS/2.  You never used it and are not familiar with its
>>>functions and advantages.   I admit today OS/2 is not used much anymore,
>>>
> and
> 
>>>it is very unlikely to see any resurgence in its use.  But I fail to see
>>>
> why
> 
>>>you and people like you seem to "hate" anything other than your current
>>>
> os
> 
>>>pet of the month.
>>>
>>You are so blinded by your ignorance.  I've never said one bad thing
>>about OS/2, I've questioned your comments, and now your integrity.  The
>>issue has nothing to do with OS/2, but your comments regarding the use
>>by various companies.  You in turn, keep turning it around into an
>>non-existent issue of my opinion of OS/2.  You're no better then the
>>Microsoft folks yourself.  Someone says it's an apple, you say no it's
>>not it's green.
>>
>>The bottom line is you're a bigger OS/2 biggot then all the folks you
>>call biggots.  You're the one that needs to look in the mirror.  When
>>you make statements that people know are not true, your integrity is
>>damaged, and it'll take a long time before anyone accepts anything you
>>say at face value.
>>
>>As noted, I'll not discuss this further, I've taken it off the list,
>>further comments by you regarding the issue of your integrity and the
>>use of OS/2 at AT&T will not be responded to.
>>
>>
>>--
>>Until later: Geoffrey esoteric@3times25.net
>>
>>I didn't have to buy my radio from a specific company to listen
>>to FM, why doesn't that apply to the Internet (anymore...)?
>>
>>
>>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Am-info mailing list
> Am-info@lists.essential.org
> http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/am-info
> 
> 
> 


-- 
Until later: Geoffrey		esoteric@3times25.net

I didn't have to buy my radio from a specific company to listen
to FM, why doesn't that apply to the Internet (anymore...)?