Microsoft and Hollywood?
-
You "derived" that. That's not what she wrote. You believe it is reasonable to derive that "corporations are evil" from what Lauren wrote. I disagree.
I understand that. You don't think she's saying corporations are bad, as it seems to me otherwise, but hey, you corrected me. So, enlighten me, is she saying they are good? :confused: + :rolleyes:
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Cops & Robbers Judah Himango
-- modified at 17:41 Tuesday 30th August, 2005
Judah Himango wrote: So, enlighten me, is she saying they are good? I think she is saying that most corporations put profit above all other considerations and measure any venture by its profit potential and that she disagrees with putting profit above all other considerations. And I know that because that's what she wrote, and I chose to pay attention to what she actually wrote. If she were saying they are good, she probably would have written "Corporations are good." If she were saying that they are evil, she probably would have written "Corporations are evil." Instead, she wrote: "most corporations put profit above all other considerations and measure any venture by its profit potential" and that she disagrees with that.
-
You "derived" that. That's not what she wrote. You believe it is reasonable to derive that "corporations are evil" from what Lauren wrote. I disagree.
I understand that. You don't think she's saying corporations are bad, as it seems to me otherwise, but hey, you corrected me. So, enlighten me, is she saying they are good? :confused: + :rolleyes:
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Cops & Robbers Judah Himango
-- modified at 17:41 Tuesday 30th August, 2005
And furthermore - this thread was about "Microsoft and Hollywood" and Lauren's original point had little to do with her views on the motivations of corporations. You sort of ran off on the "anti-corporate" thing and turned the discussion into something completely different. Not that having a discussion on corporate motivations, or whether corporations are good or evil is a bad thing. Like I said before, I think you made some interesting points in the context of that discussion. But when Lauren accused you of "putting words in my mouth", she was certainly correct. You did that by ignoring what she actually wrote, in favor of a different discussion.
-
Judah Himango wrote: So, enlighten me, is she saying they are good? I think she is saying that most corporations put profit above all other considerations and measure any venture by its profit potential and that she disagrees with putting profit above all other considerations. And I know that because that's what she wrote, and I chose to pay attention to what she actually wrote. If she were saying they are good, she probably would have written "Corporations are good." If she were saying that they are evil, she probably would have written "Corporations are evil." Instead, she wrote: "most corporations put profit above all other considerations and measure any venture by its profit potential" and that she disagrees with that.
This is really a pointless argument, Mike. I asked the reasoning behind the idea that corporations are "bad". I asked this because she said she was anti-corporate. You split hairs over whether she believes corporations are "bad" or not. X| Ok, that's nice and fine. Let me rephrase my original question so as to get around your hair splitting arguments: What is the thinking behind the anti-corporate idea, given that a corporation's sole existance is to make money? Problem solved. :-)
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Cops & Robbers Judah Himango
-
And furthermore - this thread was about "Microsoft and Hollywood" and Lauren's original point had little to do with her views on the motivations of corporations. You sort of ran off on the "anti-corporate" thing and turned the discussion into something completely different. Not that having a discussion on corporate motivations, or whether corporations are good or evil is a bad thing. Like I said before, I think you made some interesting points in the context of that discussion. But when Lauren accused you of "putting words in my mouth", she was certainly correct. You did that by ignoring what she actually wrote, in favor of a different discussion.
I apologize for hijacking the thread. My intention with the question of anti-corporate thinking was for understanding it myself, not for hijacking the whole dang thread. :-)
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Cops & Robbers Judah Himango
-
This is really a pointless argument, Mike. I asked the reasoning behind the idea that corporations are "bad". I asked this because she said she was anti-corporate. You split hairs over whether she believes corporations are "bad" or not. X| Ok, that's nice and fine. Let me rephrase my original question so as to get around your hair splitting arguments: What is the thinking behind the anti-corporate idea, given that a corporation's sole existance is to make money? Problem solved. :-)
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Cops & Robbers Judah Himango
Judah Himango wrote: This is really a pointless argument, Mike I'm afraid I won't let you go with that. This is neither an argument, nor is it pointless. The point is (and I'm still not sure you're getting it) Lauren made very specific (and quite clear) statements. You derived something entirely different, and made a new conversation from it. In doing so, you showed no recognition that you were in fact "putting words into Lauren's mouth" and that that was causing frustration. The new conversation was good. Nothing wrong with it (start a new thread, and I might even join you on it... maybe even *agree* with some of your points!) But you don't recognize the frustration you caused Lauren and how you caused that frustration by conflating her words into yours. This is not "splitting hairs", nor is it pointless. You just don't like the point!
-
Hi Judah. I won't presume to speak for Lauren, but it seems clear that you have taken something simple she stated and attempted to turn it into something else, for which I wouldn't blame Lauren should she be frustrated by it. As I read this thread, I got frustrated by it. Lauren wrote: "im as anti-corporation as anyone"... You turned it into: "all corporations are bad"... that's not what she wrote. Lauren wrote: "i dont work for a corporation and i never will... its not compatible with my view of life"... You turned it into "corporations are evil"... that's not what she wrote. Lauren wrote: "i think most corporations put profit above all other considerations and measure any venture by its profit potential ... that is where i 100% disagree with them ..." You wrote to her: "If you can't or won't explain yourself, that's fine, I was only curious to understand the thinking behind the 'all corporations are bad' idea" I think Lauren explained herself quite well, and frankly given how you responded, she was right in assuming that further explanation would do her no good. Are you sure you paid attention to what she actually wrote, as opposed to what you *think* she meant? I appreciate the points she made. You have created an entire discussion line that suggested she said something different. I think you made some interesting points too, even eloquently, but you were discussing something different, and again, I wouldn't blame Lauren should she be frustrated by your lack of attention to what she *actually wrote*.
-
I just wanted to thank everyone that commented on this thread. I am really hoping that the customer wins out on this one but it is not a level playing field, in a time when the government wants to regulate everything from the internet, to TV to IP Phones I feel this is a loosing battle. Next will be grid/utility computing where none of the software is yours, none of the hardware is yours and you will only have access to content via subscription fee. Well I guess we have no choice but to sit down and wait...or do we? Will
-
Judah Himango wrote: This is really a pointless argument, Mike I'm afraid I won't let you go with that. This is neither an argument, nor is it pointless. The point is (and I'm still not sure you're getting it) Lauren made very specific (and quite clear) statements. You derived something entirely different, and made a new conversation from it. In doing so, you showed no recognition that you were in fact "putting words into Lauren's mouth" and that that was causing frustration. The new conversation was good. Nothing wrong with it (start a new thread, and I might even join you on it... maybe even *agree* with some of your points!) But you don't recognize the frustration you caused Lauren and how you caused that frustration by conflating her words into yours. This is not "splitting hairs", nor is it pointless. You just don't like the point!
Mike Ellison wrote: I'm afraid I won't let you go with that. Darn, I was hoping to get away with that! ;-) Ok, I take back my points about her thinking corporations are evil. I will instead say she is anti-corporate, and I only assume she believes corporations are generally "bad". :-) *edit* hey, thanks for the comments about the blog, I appreciate it.
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Cops & Robbers Judah Himango
-- modified at 10:42 Wednesday 31st August, 2005
-
Mike Ellison wrote: I'm afraid I won't let you go with that. Darn, I was hoping to get away with that! ;-) Ok, I take back my points about her thinking corporations are evil. I will instead say she is anti-corporate, and I only assume she believes corporations are generally "bad". :-) *edit* hey, thanks for the comments about the blog, I appreciate it.
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Cops & Robbers Judah Himango
-- modified at 10:42 Wednesday 31st August, 2005
Nope, you still don't get it.
-
Nope, you still don't get it.
What, would you have me apologize to Lauren for making her feel frustrated? :rolleyes: It wasn't my intent to frustrate anyone, I simply asked a question about her views which seem prevalent among a lot of tech people. Now that this thread has been long since been forked into a wild tangent from my initial query, I'm done arguing, you win.
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Cops & Robbers Judah Himango
-
What, would you have me apologize to Lauren for making her feel frustrated? :rolleyes: It wasn't my intent to frustrate anyone, I simply asked a question about her views which seem prevalent among a lot of tech people. Now that this thread has been long since been forked into a wild tangent from my initial query, I'm done arguing, you win.
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Cops & Robbers Judah Himango
Nope - swing and a miss again.