--- In msp430@msp4..., "badpacket94501" <badpacket94501@y...>
wrote:
> --- In msp430@msp4..., "Tam" <embedded1@y...> wrote:
> > I do not really wish to carry on, especially here, unless of course
> > you are adamant about it.
> >
> > Tam.
>
> BS, you are having a blast doing this.
> As a newbie here, I'm getting tired of it, and I'm not even one of
> the 'real' users here looking to get some help (yet).
>
> Please STFU!

Sorry, I fed the troll.
Guess the local constabulary will be about soon enough to clap me in
irons for addressing my betters.

BTW Bruce, you're a more even handed guy than many I think.

--- In msp430@msp4..., "Tam" <embedded1@y...> wrote:
> I do not really wish to carry on, especially here, unless of course
> you are adamant about it.
>
> Tam.

BS, you are having a blast doing this.
As a newbie here, I'm getting tired of it, and I'm not even one of
the 'real' users here looking to get some help (yet).

Please STFU!

microbit wrote:
>
> > For you to then assert 'should...right now' is alittle premature.
> > I quote,
>
> > "you should remove any copies of CrossWorks that you have on your
> > machine(s) right now, nothing more"
>
> This a prime example of the dilemma/challenge - I think - all "posters"
> face here.
>
> How does Tam interpret this statement ?
> ----------
> You can read :
>
> - That Paul refers to SW on Tam's PC right now should be removed when it is refunded.
> - Or that Tam should remove his SW right now (before he is refunded).
>
> Being non-verbose about this things invites ambiguity.
> It is extremely hard to compose short but non-ambiguous Emails, and I face that all the time in my business'
> Emails, hence I make mine more verbose, to remove the "Oracle of Delphi" element.

What if you use neither program? Oracle or Delphi that is!

> For you to then assert 'should...right now' is alittle premature.
> I quote,

> "you should remove any copies of CrossWorks that you have on your
> machine(s) right now, nothing more"

This a prime example of the dilemma/challenge - I think - all "posters"
face here.

How does Tam interpret this statement ?
----------
You can read :

- That Paul refers to SW on Tam's PC right now should be removed when it is refunded.
- Or that Tam should remove his SW right now (before he is refunded).

Being non-verbose about this things invites ambiguity.
It is extremely hard to compose short but non-ambiguous Emails, and I face that all the time in my business'
Emails, hence I make mine more verbose, to remove the "Oracle of Delphi" element.

An alternative maybe would have been .... "to remove your current SW when you are refunded".
Seems easier to me.

Is Tam justified in commenting a mute prerequisite on this forum is a PhD in text comms ?
Perhaps, but seems being a Barrister is a worthy asset on here.

Oh well.

Kris
Microbit Systems
www.microbit.com.au

--- In msp430@msp4..., "Paul Curtis" <plc@r...> wrote:
> Tam,
>
> > The only proviso, of course, would be
> > > that you remove all copies of CrossStudio from your machines.
>
> > Paul you know perfectly well that I have only installed 'ONE' copy of
> > Crossstudio. You have only ever 'issued' ONE KEY !!!
>
> I'm not at the office right now, so I can't examine the records.
> However, we have supplied a number of activation keys to you during the
> beta period; these should now be dead, of course.

First of all. It seems that you have interpreted my punctuation
(capitals) as shouting. Considering the fact that the 'editor' at his
forum is very limited, I used capitals to clarify that I was quoting
you. I didn't write in that way with the intention of giving the
impression that I was shouting.
Incidently, I don't shout very easily and when I do, it is
generally heard farther than anticipated, usually to the suprise of
some, guess how Ortega y Gasset (1883-1955) said about suprise. "To
be suprised, to wonder, is to begin to understand".

You are suprising me each time, because in a previous message (3261)
I did ask you on more than one instance to 'call it a day', to put an
end to taking up so much of my time. No doubt yours too.

Besides, I didn't realise that it was a prerequisite to have a PhD in
text communications to participate in this group. I could be extra
sarcastic and ask if you are aspiring a role of the 'forum etiquette
prefect' in the near future, but I shan't bother.

Going back to your message. You're not making sense are you. What is
the point of you stating that I have received a number of keys, when
you immediately follow it up by saying 'these should all be dead, of
course'?

My 'actual point' should have been clear to you, that you only ever
issued 'one permanent key' unless of course you are suggesting that
it is actually feasible to convert 'temporary keys' to 'permanent'
ones.

If you were not at the office when you composed your message, don't
you think it was a bit hasty of you to write the message that you
did? You could have waited for the following day when you got to your
office when you could have been 'certain' about what you were talking
about.

> > So I am not sure where you are going with the 'REMOVE ALL COPIES FROM
> > YOUR MACHINES' statement above.
>
> No need to shout. The statement is not meant to inflame, just to state
> that you should remove any copies of CrossWorks that you have on your
> machine(s) right now, nothing more.
>
> > But. It is good to know that you unconditional offer of a full refund
> > is there.
>

I will need to get my legal people to examine the EULA about this. As
I have not yet asked for a refund.

As in my previous statement, at this stage, it is good to know. I
quite understand the condition, which again is very inappropriate for
you to suggest that I might accept a refund and continue to use your
product.

These allegations and suggestions have obviously diminished our
chances of disassociation, because you have been putting further
ideas into the minds of other vendores observing these messages.

There is intelligence here among these messages to say that you did
in fact play an active role in 'confusing matters' by having parallel
communication channels with those already participating in the
debates at the forum.

This has evidently made life very difficult for me. Therefore, if you
would like to arrange for a similar replacement for me, then I would
be happy to disassociate myself from RAL and to remove the
application from my PC immediately, otherwise it seems inevitable
that you will maintain the tension between us and deny me of any
technical support. I can live with that.

> It is contingent on removal of the software, hence the offer it not
> completely unconditional, and I don't see this as an unreasonable
> request or one that you would have any qualms accepting. However, there
> are no other conditions attached to the offer.
>
> -- Paul.

Again I have not yet asked for a refund, so you are speculating here.

I quote you from message (3260)...

">The only proviso, of course, would be
>that you remove all copies of CrossStudio from your machines."

The key point here being the word 'would'.

For you to then assert 'should...right now' is alittle premature.
I quote,

"you should remove any copies of CrossWorks that you have on your
> machine(s) right now, nothing more"

For future reference, you don't need to use the plural of machine, PC
or licence, I only have ever had one full licence on one PC. Fully
paid for.

I can't recall breaking our agreement. I simply asked (directly) for
cooperation regarding our difference of opinion regarding a message I
had posted, on a trivial matter, on this forum, but I didn't get it.

That later transpired into the correspondence which took place here
at the forum, with your consent, from the very beginning.

That is how simple this matter was at that time.

If you do have anything further to add, I propose that you e-mail me
directly so that we can continue without making so much 'noise' here
at the forum as I feel that I have now reached the end of all
specifics about my inital message any the response I got in return
from you to it.

I do not really wish to carry on, especially here, unless of course
you are adamant about it.

Tam.

Hi Tam / Paul,

> > So I am not sure where you are going with the 'REMOVE ALL COPIES FROM
> > YOUR MACHINES' statement above.
>
> No need to shout. The statement is not meant to inflame, just to state
> that you should remove any copies of CrossWorks that you have on your
> machine(s) right now, nothing more.

I have to go with Paul here Tam : Fair has to be "fair".
After all, you get a full refund, but RAL gets nothing back .
On the contrary, you are trusted to remove the SW from your machine, it is
considered
- in lieue of refund - as a consumable (ie. it cannot be returned)
Put yourself in RAL's shoes Tam :

What guarantees them that you will remove the CW software after you are
refunded ?
Someone else could "buy" the license eg. by using your harddisk (which of
course would be silly really)
I think that is fair enough too !

Let's all get back to other things now.

Cheers,
Kris

OK, at this point, it's personal business. Please take it off list.

--John

Tam,

> The only proviso, of course, would be
> > that you remove all copies of CrossStudio from your machines.

> Paul you know perfectly well that I have only installed 'ONE' copy of
> Crossstudio. You have only ever 'issued' ONE KEY !!!

I'm not at the office right now, so I can't examine the records.
However, we have supplied a number of activation keys to you during the
beta period; these should now be dead, of course.

> So I am not sure where you are going with the 'REMOVE ALL COPIES FROM
> YOUR MACHINES' statement above.

No need to shout. The statement is not meant to inflame, just to state
that you should remove any copies of CrossWorks that you have on your
machine(s) right now, nothing more.

> But. It is good to know that you unconditional offer of a full refund
> is there.

It is contingent on removal of the software, hence the offer it not
completely unconditional, and I don't see this as an unreasonable
request or one that you would have any qualms accepting. However, there
are no other conditions attached to the offer.

-- Paul.

Hi Jon,

> By the way, try hitchhiking around in France. Then go to
> Germany. Totally different experience.

I hitchhiked from Marmaris, Sth Turkey to Carcasonne, Sth France (near
Montreal) in 1 week - (in 1988)
Hitchhiking in Turkey never took longer than 30 secs of waiting.
Once, 400 km Sth of Istanbul, an armoured car with money transport stopped
and
drove us for 100 kms :-) !!
People are incredibly, incredibly friendly there.
Pity US didn't care about the killing of tens of thousands of Kurds back
then by Saddam Hussein
and his chemical weapon freaks back just before Gulf war !!

Best regards,
Kris

On Sat, 28 Jun 2003 15:42:52 -0700, you wrote:

>At 03:06 PM 6/28/2003 -0700, Jonathan Kirwan wrote:
>> >Try to sell a product. Then talk to me :-) May be Open Source is your
>> >answer. That's fine with me. Be well.
>>
>>Richard, I've been there. At least as much as you have been.
>>You discredit me by imagining I haven't.
>>...
>
>OK, sorry, no slight is intended. Of course I was referring to anyone who
>has this sort of concern, not just you specifically. Wait, may be all of
>you have such experience too, oh no :-) .....

Hehe!! Could you imagine it if all your customers were
pugnacious, experienced businessfolk?? Only in your worst
nightmares. ;)

Jon

Beginning Microcontrollers with the MSP430