Subject: Re: The merger: a user's perspective
From: Ian Lance Taylor <ian@airs.com>
Date: 18 Nov 1999 13:17:16 -0500

   From: Russell Nelson <nelson@crynwr.com>
   Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 13:12:10 -0500 (EST)

   Ian Lance Taylor writes:
    > There is a classic case of a lumber company which harvested their
    > forest more or less responsibly, and was then bought out on the
    > stock market by an organization which simply cut down the entire
    > forest and liquidated the company in order to get a fast good
    > return on their investment.

   Essentially you're arguing that the price for standing trees is wrong,
   without expressing a willingness to buy them at a higher price.
   Essentially that's the same as going to Linus and saying "Your kernel
   scheduler is all wrong.  You should implement the foobar algorithm
   that Chiang No Body wrote up in SPE." without actually being willing
   to take the time to implement the algorithm as a patch.

   The proper action upon discovering a bad algorithm, or a bad price, is
   to offer a better one.  Anything less deserves a quick hit on the
   delete button, nothing more.

This same argument can be used to support slavery.

I say that slavery is wrong, and that people should be free.  You say
that I'm arguing that the price for slaves is wrong, without
expressing a willingness to buy them at a higher price.  I should just
buy the slaves and free them myself.

What's the difference?

Ian