Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> On Tue, 04 Mar 2008 07:45:04 +0100, Peter Köhlmann wrote:
>
>> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 04 Mar 2008 00:51:56 +0100, Peter Köhlmann wrote:
>>>
>>>>> It's not even true. I had 3 messages with the guy, and HE asked ME
>>>>> for
>>>>> information. I did not "harass" him.
>>>>
>>>> Did *he* initiate the exchange? Or did you the first step?
>>>
>>> You're fully aware that I contacted the author and asked him if Roy had
>>> had aquired permission to use the image.
>>
>> Right, I know that. In other words, you went after Roy
>> You initiated the exchange
>
> Roy posted a link to the page in COLA. I went to the link, and something
> smelled fishy. I was right.
And to counter the message you went after the messenger.
Yes, that was soooo nice of you, Erik.
After all, Roy attributed the images to their author, so it had to
be "fishy"
Did you take the same amount of work unto yourself when Wjbell posted a
complete firewall script with all copyrights removed as "his own"?
Why not? You did not even comment on that. Figures. Wjbell, who really is a
thief, is "one of your own"
Did you comment on the way flatfish pirated software? Why not? Could it be
that you found it not "necessary" because flatfish is "one of your own"?
How come that you only find fault with linux advocates, but next to never
with windows shills, even when their behaviour is much worse?
--
You're not my type. For that matter, you're not even my species
|
|
