SLSIA

>>> "Jeff Lightner" <jlightner at water.com> 9/7/2006 1:48:11 PM >>>
I didn't start the thread Bob.  

I also never said that Symantec WOULD do this but that they COULD do
this.  Notice the keyword "may" in my original sentence.  My comment
related to a possible outcome of the article and went to the title of
the thread "fame at last" pointing out that there can be a downside to
such "fame".

If you really don't like reading off topic stuff then you wouldn't
have
read my second post.   I'm entitled to my opinions.  You're entitled
to
yours as well no matter how wrong they may be.   Do you have stock in
Symantec that requires you to take personal umbrage at such
suggestions?

-----Original Message-----
From: bob944 [mailto:bob944 at attglobal.net] 
Sent: Thursday, September 07, 2006 1:33 PM
To: veritas-bu at mailman.eng.auburn.edu; Jeff Lightner
Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] Fame at last.

>From some strange Oliver-Stoneish planet, "Jeff Lightner"
<jlightner at water.com> wrote

> The downside to an article like this is that pinhead execs
> instead of deciding to fix the problems may decide it is
> better to suppress forums like this and start lawsuits for
> libel to do that.

and followed that gem with

> I didn't say they had a good case for libel but rather that
> they might try such a case to suppress a forum.  I doubt the
> people that sponsor most forums have deep enough pockets or
> desire to get into a protracted legal wrangle just to continue
> doing so.

making these the two most irresponsible and uncalled-for statements
I've
ever seen in a peer-support mailing list.

Perhaps we can get back to NetBackup instead of dreaming up conspiracy
fantasies.



_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu at mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/pipermail/veritas-bu/attachments/20060907/803e4d65/attachment.html