Excuse me??? Don't insult me. Go back to the appropriate threads and respond to the specific and amply detailed allegations I make therein.

In my vew, you have no ethics, period.

**--** Steve



>>Actually, John, the difference of opinion I completely accept.
>
>Good.....
>
><<
>It's the fabrications that I don't accept.
><<
>
>I am not fabricating anything. If you want to say that I am mis-interpreting visible trends, fine. You and I can look at a set of events. I have a perspective and you have a perspective. Where you might have an optimistic viewpoint, I might have a pessimistic viewpoint or vice-versa.
>
><<
>You're a pathological liar and you have no ethics, and this means you naturally just don't see any problem.
><<
>
>Because you say so. In the end, that is all you offer to substantiate this claim. Offering an opinion does not equate to lying. As far as ethics are concerned, you keep laying the charge that I lack ethics. This got me to think about this issue.
>
>First, is this an issue of morals? I don't think it is. This is an issue about business and nothing to do with morality at all.
>
>Second, is this an issue of me violating a set of standards that governs the conduct of members of a profession? The answer is decidely no since this is both not a profession and further, there is no code of conduct that governs how people can behave.
>
>I am left with the conclusion that whatever standards I have violated, they are your personal standards. And FWIW, that is A-OK with me, as long as you qualify it. i.e., it is just fine to say that I violate your own personal ethics. But to take it beyond that, you are overreaching. Let me illustrate with an example:
>
>A developer might convince a company to spend millions of dollars on software. It may very well be the case that the company could have spent far less and achieve the same goals. Internet consulting firms do this (at least they used too) all the time. Others have too I am sure. Is this unethical? I don't know. Some would say yes and some would say no, it is just a good business deal for one of the parties. Good old fashioned capitalism! IAC, the situation is open to interpretation.
>
>In a separate post, you alluded to the "damage" a guy like me can cause. This got me to thinking about what you could be talking about. After all, I am simply one guy with an opinion. It then dawned on me that maybe you were not talking macro, but rather, you were talking micro. Perhaps you have sold a bill of goods that you are left to defend? Perhaps you see what I am saying as some sort of threat to you, promises you have made, etc??? Perhaps my opinions amount to me "pissing" in your pond?? IAC, I don't know the answer and quite frankly, I don't really care. Posts are made and I respond like anybody else with my opinion. It seems whenever I say anything negative as it pertains to Fox, you are right there to jump down my throat. IMO, you are taking this stuff WAY too personally.
>
>As always, I leave my invitation open to you for honest and fair debate on this issue. We could have an online debate where a panel asks questions. FWIW, I think it is an important issue to discuss. As you know, I am particularly sensitive to those people that find themselves without work and Fox is their only significant marketable skill. As much as you think I am spewing venom and mis-information about Fox, I believe that folks like you paint too rosy a picture and quite frankley, have mis-interpreted the facts in the marketplace. Unlike you, I don't resort to strawman/ad hominum personal attacks.
>
>Whatever your issues are, I suspect they have more to do with your own making an nothing to do with what I have posted...
>
>Regards,