Re: Awright, let's get this straight, people

From: soliiigm@aol.com (Sol III GM)

Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 00:00:00 +0000

Christopher Robin Kessel said:
>|> >As for free PBM's, as long as the moderator is voluntarily running
the
>|> >show for no money, sounds fine to me.  People have been advertising
>|>
>|>   Let me get this straight.  You are saying that free games can
advertise
>|> to their hearts content, but commercial games should not be able to?
>|> Since both are providing the same service, and the only difference
that is
>|> apparent is what it costs to play, that is somewhat strange.
>
>No, the difference is whether or not your making money by abusing the
>tax-backed Usenet to get free advertising.

Tax-backed?  Funny, I just did a quick search here on the message
header.  Every single server that your message went through to get to my
newsreader was a private company.  I doubt me that more than 10% of the
Usenet is held up by tax-supported institutions.  Even if it were so, what
do you want to do about places that specificaly ask for ads, such as
.marketplace, .ads, and .biz groups, as well as groups that welcome ads
into the mainstream as long as they are pointed and on-topic?
  Laying that aside, because it's just too silly to deal with, we come to
the other matter.  The idea that two people providing the same type of
service are somehow different because they differ in what they expect in
return for the service?  That's also appears silly, but it's something
that I would like explained further, if you do not mind.  There is always
the possibility that I am not reading your post the way you meant it to be
read.

>Commercial vs. non-commercial.  The two are very different, check
>with any lawyer.  You're just conveniently overlooking the difference
>since it suits you.

A lawyer will tell you that the only difference between the two is the
fee, nothing else.  Both still have the same problems, and the same laws,
other than taxes and such associated with collecting fees.  One of the
biggest myths in this country (USA) is that you can skirt certain laws
(such as copyright) because you are not "commercial".

>I said before, I'll say it again.  Noone can really stop you from
>abusing Usenet.  The only thing in your way is your own sense of
>right and wrong.  It's pretty clear from your posts that money
>matters more to you than your ethics.  Given that I suppose its
>pointless to respond any further.  You've made it clear money
>drives your viewpoint.

I defy you to point to ANYTHING in a single post that I have written
that supports your position.  Be sure to show the whole quote in context.
  Meanwhile, I can point to numerous things in the same posts that have
said that my Ethics (I dislike the term of Sense of Right and Wrong, since
it involves a negative judgement on others) are what keep me from
following the pack and attempting to skirt the spirit of the FAQ.  If
money drove my viewpoint, I would find another business, post haste.
  If you are going to flame someone, make sure you have the facts to
support your position.  In this case, you do not.

Eagle
Sol III Game Master
Sol III Play By E-Mail Role Playing Game
http://members.aol.com/soliiigm/

Friends come and go.  Enemies accumulate.

References

Re: Awright, let's get this straight, people
chrisk@iago.NoSubdomain.NoDomain (Chris Kessel)
Thu, 26 Jun 1997 00:00:00 +0000