-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 19 Sep 2007 08:06:46 +0100,
Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> ____/ Jim Richardson on Wednesday 19 September 2007 05:36 : \____
>
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On Wed, 19 Sep 2007 03:22:08 -0000,
>> Tim Smith <reply_in_group@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> On 2007-09-19, Jim Richardson <warlock@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 16:49:29 -0000,
>>>> Tim Smith <reply_in_group@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>> On 2007-09-18, Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>> This also explains why Rob Weir and Bob Sutor fought OOXML so viciously.
>>>>>
>>>>> The term you usually use for this is "shill".
>>>>
>>>> you mean like MS buying votes in various commitees during the ISO voting
>>>> for OOXML fastrack?
>>>
>>> Yes, Roy would use the term shill there.
>>
>> I was asking if *you* would use the term shill, there?
>
> Please don't reply to "Tim Smith".
It's not your call. Tim can be annoying, but he's not a fanboi, and he's
been reasonable in debates. Not perfect, just like the rest of us.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFG8c9rd90bcYOAWPYRAhg6AKC0Q5U/5biWIQ9BEbK5JVNDpMFy1ACeMkxz
tkl05p58yRVqKoZXA8G/VUM=
=pMXX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
Does Emacs have the Buddha nature? Why not? It has bloody well
everything else
|
|
