On Sun, 19 Aug 2007 17:48:25 +0000, waterskidoo wrote:
> On 2007-08-19, Rick <none@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Sat, 18 Aug 2007 15:21:08 +0000, waterskidoo wrote:
>>
>> "Accessing the content while blocking the ads, therefore would be no
>> less than stealing."
>>
>> Just what content is being stolen, and why should I be forced to view
>> adds that add nothing to the content?
>>
>> "Demographics have shown that not only are FireFox users a somewhat
>> small percentage of the internet, they actually are even smaller in
>> terms of online spending,"
>>
>> What demographics show Firefox users "are even smaller in terms of
>> online spending,"?
>>
>> "If you are offended by the Mozilla Corporation's endorsement of
>> dishonesty please contact the Mozilla Foundation and ask them to stop
>> empowering internet theft."
>>
>> Mozilla Corporation endorses dishonesty? I think not.
>
> Of course not, you guys are missing the point. I said *in principle*,
> meaning the concept of boycotting, setting up a site to do such etc.
.. and the problem with boycotting something you don't agree with? The
problem with anti-Mozilla page is that it is blatantly dishonest and is
intentionally spewing FUD.
> Not the actual content.
> His content is way strange in my opinion.
--
Rick
|
|
