>>>I'm not interested in reading this sort of material on this forum.
>>>
>>>In a separate thread I'll ask Michel to review your previous post.
>>
>>Thank you, Al.
>>
>>It may be interesting for you to note that you're willing to stand up for what you believe is right... but when others do, and it goes against something you personally believe is right, you criticize and report them. You're willing to "tidy up the forum" and keep what you disagree with out, but what is the purpose of my post if not an attempt to teach people something they may not be considering today, which is a way big business and dominating / control influences are infiltrating the entire IT world unaware?
>>
>>My entire purpose in posting my replies to Rick Strahl relates to the direction our industry is going. It's a philosophical viewpoint, and one that's backed up by evidence over a time period of well over a decade now, and specifically related to the published / verified revelations of Edward Snowden.
>>
>>Have you ever stopped to consider such things? And I'm generally curious: why are you so offended by the thought that our industry may be going in the wrong direction? Do you believe in being an owner of your code and data? Or are you content to be a renter? Do you know what the difference is?
>>
>>UPDATE: I seriously thought you were referring to my reply to Rick Strahl about the direction our industry is going (toward making us renters, not owners). In reading your post and following the link to the message you cite ... I'm amazed you reported that post. It's an exhortation to do better and be more than you are today, Al. It's an encouragement toward being even the best you can be, and to help others be the best they can be. I do not understand your "I'm not interested in reading this sort of material on this forum." comment. Everyone needs encouragement. Myself included. And we are better off when we all encourage one another to do better and be more.
>
>Michel Fournier specifically created the Chatter4U forum for this sort of metaphysical discussion. IMO that's where it belongs.
>
>If Michel disagrees, then I'll just block your posts. Which would be a bit of a shame, some of them are technically interesting, but at this time there's no fine-grained control over it.

Since the mail to MS on Chens work I think the way Ricks world view operates incompatible with mine and probably a few more UTers, esp. as it endangered the real live and monetary well-being of another member.

My wish for fine-grained control was not answered - but I did not second your post to Michael, as the new issue as far as I read in your posts is not endangering the others, only gritting nerves with holier-than-you attitude. I share some of his echoed doubts about run to cloud/foreign control, but don't think it is a matter to preach, but to pay "privacy tax" (or not) and *perhaps* argue when sitting with a glass of beer or wine ;-)

Seconding now for the old issue would be Cato-the-elder style in parroting mode, which I don't want to emulate ;-)