Subject: Re: Definition of open source
From: 'Rick Moen' <>
Date: Sun, 7 Nov 2004 15:44:37 -0800

Quoting Alan Rihm (

> Rick, I appreciate your position, and do not feel the need to continue
> the discussion.

Do that mean "Yes, our firm will correct the error of posting a deceptive 
claim of open-source licensing on its Web pages", or "No, we like
deceiving the public that way just fine, thanks"?

Given that you are consistently evading the subject and apparently think
nobody will notice, I will provisionally assume you mean the latter.

> If you can suggest one that deals with our exact business model, then we
> would appreciate the guidance. If not, then we will simply go the
> direction we are going.

Ah, a deliberate attempt to deceive of the public, then.  How unfortunate
for your firm.

I imagine you will get no assistance whatsoever on this mailing list,
under these conditions.

Cheers,                 There are 10 kinds of people in the world, those who 
Rick Moen               know ternary, those who don't, and those who are now     looking for their dictionaries.  -- Ron Fabre