Suggestions please for what POP or IMAP servers to use

David Schwartz davids at webmaster.com
Tue Dec 18 23:04:30 PST 2007


> I will act as an arbiter for a minute here, can I?
> The support for your position comes in bulk from "historical" data. Ted
> holds that the whole Netscape ordeal was manipulated to intentionally
> put Microsoft into vulnerable position in that respect, so as to divert
> attention of the court from other, far more important issues. I cannot
> judge how right this statement is, but I would thus say you are relying
> too much on those records being TRUE (a keyword here, means the kind of
> scientific truthfulness Feynman was lecturing about).

This is a better statement of what's wrong with Ted's position than I could
ever make, and I thank you.

Like any other conspiracy theory, you must interpret all the historical data
according to the rules of the conspiracy. When some off-hand remark supports
the conspiracy, it supports the conspiracy. When clear, documented
statements conflict with the conspiracy, it is evidence of the conspiracy's
effectiveness.

If recourse to the historical record is off-limits, all that is left is
speculation.

If we accept, as Ted does, that we can't trust any documentation to reflect
any truth at all, we will end up concluding whatever position we started
with. Anything that conflicts is just evidence of how well the truth we
search for was covered up.

Ted can point to *no* historical evidence or evidence of any kind to support
his claim that this revenue stream was a recognized at the time he claims it
was or that it ever motivated anyone to do anything. He can argue that it
should have and that it would be reasonable for it to have.

The biggest counter-argument -- if Microsoft had a legitimate claim like
this, they surely would have raised it in court when they faced the
equivalent of a corporate death penalty. Ted has no response to this
argument except the importance of keeping things secret. But this response
justifies the absence of any evidence at all, so defends all claims equally.
That means it supports no claims at all.

DS




More information about the freebsd-chat mailing list