>
>Nick N's. comments were also unwarrented. Pretty socio-political stuff. Are we not supposed to shy away from that sort of talk..???
I'd think so, given the global nature of the site. Sometimes sending a reply is a little too easy and this one sure puts a spotlight on how easy it is to be misunderstood when making a comment.
>
>
I THINK ALL ACCESS SHOULD BE FREE!!! FUND THE UT THROUGH AD BANNERS!!!!>
>OK????? I think my suggestion of all folks paying money to be here was the big problem. Well, I have backed off that stance.
I'm not really sure what was wrong with suggesting everyone pay, much less your current suggestion ;-)
I really think people seem to think that since something has always been "free" that it's their God-given right that it should remain that way. Guess what, there's no such thing as a free lunch. Someone has to pay for it - it's just that everyone seems to think it should be someone else. This is the same mentality that makes our taxes climb rather than fall.
Ultimately this is all Michel's decision. There wasn't anything wrong with your original message - you disagreed with the way he handled it and you said so. Maybe people took your original post as some sort of personal attack on them (maybe they feel guilty for not paying?? Nah..). At any rate, it sure degenerated quickly.
Just a suggestion for people before responding:
If you're going to disagree with someone at least give them some valid reasons and other alternatives. Otherwise you're just complaining. It's annoying in person and it's still just as annoying in your messages. And pointless.
