On Fri, 29 Aug 2003, Keith Mastin wrote:
I agree to where I've been sseing this thread going, but I have a question...
Where will this all lead to? We send a petition, they look at it and
Tongue firmly planted in cheek...: Imagine a person X and a group Y, vendor A. X must agree to document, document, document! (as in original linuxtoday article; anyone have that reference?) Where I see this going is this (t = #days): t=0: -1) X and Y agree on a course of action. t=1: 0) X starts process with vendor. t=30 1) Y: set up a web page offering help for DIYselfers. t=60 2) X and A go to small claims court t=60.5 3) X and Y party t=61 4) Y posts newsblitz: 1 peson helped t=65 5) repeat steps 0-5 with 10**i more people. The process will evolve, but not much. At the end of 111th student, Y should have iron-clad method for profit extraction. (If we bottle it, we can sell the company for $$$$$$$... 8) Y can give "refund science" diplomas to XXXXXXXXXs. Y can sell "refund science" tshirts for fun...draising. --->The real benefit is that Y and X learn how to DIY.<---
Dell is a business, so they make decisions based on the bottom line.
future bottom line or they won't budge. Why should they if it isn't plesing to shareholders?
t=180: A gives up the fight and redrafts "licence" after 1111th refund scientist graduates t=181: global linux user party (A drops by for a beer, too) "pleasing to the bottom line" = "no negative publicity" + $199 x 1111 $199 x 1111 = 221089 displeasures to shareholders. This comes from *bottom line* profits, not revenues. -- The Toronto Linux Users Group. Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml