Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!apple!agate!shelby!neon!neon!gumby
From: gumby@Cygnus.COM (David Vinayak Wallace)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next
Subject: lawsuit flame (Was: NeXTStep 2.0 Completed)
Message-ID: <GUMBY.90Dec1213449@Cygnus.COM>
Date: 2 Dec 90 05:34:49 GMT
References: <352@atncpc.UUCP> <57237@brunix.UUCP> <356@atncpc.UUCP>
Sender: news@Neon.Stanford.EDU (USENET News System)
Organization: Cygnus Support
Lines: 24
In-Reply-To: bruce@atncpc.UUCP's message of 26 Nov 90 17:24:20 GMT


   Date: 26 Nov 90 17:24:20 GMT
   From: bruce@atncpc.UUCP (Bruce Henderson)

   The F*$%&ing lawsuits of Ashton Tate embarass and annoy the hell out of
   me, too.  I have never claimed to speak for Ashton Tate, and they have
   never claimed to be acting on my behalf or with my blessing (heck, they
   didn't even consult me.... 8-)

   In the future, If you want to flame someone, it is usually useless to
   attack thier employer's actions, most employees could care less what
   the "dudes upstairs" do to amuse themselves.

This is an irresponsible attitude, especially in the Valley.  Were
Ashton-Tate producing Napalm(tm), would a Quaker work there?

If you worked in some dead-end industry like agriculture or
automobiles and had to struggle to feed your family it would be one
thing.  But in the computer industry you may change jobs at will and
work on what you want.  If you work for a company who's trying to
prevent that very freedom I can only assume you support their position.

Sorry to come on like a flame but this sounds too much like the "good
german" argument for me to take it quietly.