Checksum: 53046
Path: utzoo!utgpu!lharris
From: lharris@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu (Leonard Harris)
Date: Mon, 5-Sep-88 14:08:08 EDT
Message-ID: <1988Sep5.140808.16134@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu>
Organization: University of Toronto Computing Services
Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st
Subject: Re: Bugs in new BETA ROMS?
References: <1155@atari.UUCP>
Reply-To: lharris@gpu.utcs.UUCP (Leonard Harris)
Distribution: comp

In article <1155@atari.UUCP> good@atari.UUCP (Roy Good) writes:
>Mr. Myron Drapal's comments regarding the Beta test of the new TOS have
... (much deleted) ...
>In my posting, referred to above, I asked Mr. Drapal to publicly post his
>sources for these reports etc. I will assume that he will respond over the
>weekend and once and for all reveal these secrets.
Why should he ?  Obtaining a single copy for personal evaluation of roms
to a machine he owns is not illegal, and if it is - why not press charges?
>
>I believe that the vast majority of readers of this topic are reasonably
>mature people, since they are in the UNIXtm world [:-)], and therefore
>can derive from these types of posting the character of the poster. With
>that remark, I feel I have no need to state my own feelings.
What is this supposed to mean ?
>
>As an aside, Mr. Drapal is using the resources of AT&T to cause what is
>potentially commercial damage to Atari Corporation. Additionally, Atari
>is a customer of AT&T. I would be interested to know what AT&T Management
>feels about this type of business relationship. Maybe the System Administrator
>of this AT&T site would like to obtain a response from the appropriate
>divisional management, and also comment on whether AT&T condones this type
>of posting through its corporate systems. Since Mr. Drapal does not include
>any disclaimer to the contrary in his postings, and since he signs his
>postings as "AT&T Bell Laboratories, Denver", I (and any other reader) have
>no reason to believe other than that his comments reflect the opinions of
>AT&T.
>
Now - this is what prompted me to reply.  This is hitting below the belt.
If Atari is going to use their "corporate weight" (hah!) to censor the net
then I move that Atari be banned from the net.
This is a non-commercial service to provide INFORMATION.  If company A says
company B's product is bad and has proof of it, readers of the net should
know.  If you try to imply that AT&T is trying to badmouth Atari and that
will hurt sales just because an Atari user who happens to be an employee of
AT&T found some bugs in your code then you are a very stupid and ignorant
person.
Again - is this the public image Atari wants to project?
(Please don't contact UofT - yes they buy your machines and some develop code
for it.  I doubt they will care if my opinions hurt your feelings.  I pay
cash for my account.)  
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Roy J. Good
>Product Development, Atari Corporation
>
>Views expressed are my own. Atari may agree or disagree; they have the right.
As public spokesman for Atari, I hope they do agree with your views !!!
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

NO DISCLAIMER !
Leonard Harris
Satisfied with Atari products
Disatisfied with Atari hiring decisions